2.45ct vs 2.63ct Engagement Ring

[Kl366]

Hi all,

I have narrowed down to two diamonds below and it would be greatly appreciated if you guys tell me which one has a better cut / light performance based on the ASET images!

2.452 F VS2: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4293577.htm
2.635 F VS2: https://www.whiteflash.com/loose-diamonds/round-cut-loose-diamond-4187419.htm

That aside, do you think there is a visual difference in terms of the size? There's only a 10% price difference between the two diamonds, is it worth paying extra?

Thanks!

 

[AllAboardTheBlingTrain]

I’ll leave comments on the actual stones themselves to other, more expert posters, because they both look great to me.

As for visual size, you’d need the ring size to be sure, but I think a 0.2mm size diff is the smallest point at which there’s a noticeable difference but that’s usually in comparison, not from memory. The 2.6 gets you over the 2.5ct mark, if that makes any difference psychologically. You can model that diff on diamdb (I’ve attached it for a US 6.5 size since that seems to be a pretty average hand size. The diff will be more pronounced on a smaller hand and less pronounced on a bigger one. I tend to think that the 4k difference could be used towards a different piece of jewelry that will make a bigger visible difference (like a pave band or eternity ring) but if the difference is nominal for you, go for the one with better optics.

 

[Gussie]

I have found that the diamdb 2D comparison is not what's actually seen IRL. I definitely think it will be a noticeable size difference in the two.

Since both have beautiful specs,, go big or go home!

 

[tyty333]

I have found that the diamdb 2D comparison is not what's actually seen IRL. I definitely think it will be a noticeable size difference in the two.

Since both have beautiful specs,, go big or go home!

I agree with @Gussie ... diamdb doesnt (cant) really give you the 3D effect which usually shows a bigger difference.

Ask WF for a side by side picture or possibly both stones between fingers so you can get a truer feeling for the size difference.

Both stones will be beautiful...I think if the extra 10% isnt an issue then I say go big.

 

[Kl366]

Thanks all for the advice!

 

[Kl366]

I agree with @Gussie ... diamdb doesnt (cant) really give you the 3D effect which usually shows a bigger difference.

Ask WF for a side by side picture or possibly both stones between fingers so you can get a truer feeling for the size difference.

Both stones will be beautiful...I think if the extra 10% isnt an issue then I say go big.

Although WF states that both stones are eye clean, there seems to be more inclusion in the 2.6ct one. Do you think that would be an issue?

 

[AprilBaby]

I see no problem with either one, go big!

 

[stonehunter20]

Beautiful stone! The size difference is very subtle! If i wanted to save $, I will get the smaller one because from a size perspective, it's not worth paying more. But if budget allows, I'd get the bigger one.