Brilliance 86 · Fire 89 · Scintillation 79 · in our census, where the T73 scores 98 · 76 · 80 in GGG
How the Trilliant Cut handles light in GGG, measured: brilliance 86, fire 89 and 10% leakage, set against the T73 in the same stone and against the same cut in diamond.
Light Return map of the Trilliant Cut in GGG, face-up, from our own tracer at refractive index 1.97. Red, green and blue return light to the eye; gray leaks.
Trilliant Cut GGG
GGG has a refractive index of 1.970 and a dispersion of 0.045. Its critical angle, from the low end of that range, is 30.5°, so a round design needs a pavilion of at least 37.4° for head-on light to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. We trace it with one index, 1.970, the midpoint of the published range, and a fire spread of 0.039, 0.86 of the published dispersion. Every picture here is our Light Return tracer at 1.970, and every figure is from the same light census that scores the other gemstones; the 3D Gemstone Simulator shows the Trilliant Cut in GGG live.
The Trilliant Cut has 70 facets and a total depth of 58.9% of its width; its pavilion mains sit at 39.0°. In GGG, the census returns 86 of 100 for brilliance and 89 for fire, against 98 and 76 for the T73, our benchmark, in the same stone; the same Trilliant Cut in diamond reads 78 and 83.
Is GGG good in a Trilliant? Pros and cons, measured
Compared with the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG and with the Trilliant Cut in diamond.
A difference counts from 3 points (Brilliance, Fire, Tilt, Leakage), 5 (Scintillation,
Symmetry), 4% (face-up size per carat) or 5% (weight); Tilt counts as a pro only for a stone within
5 points of the brilliance it is compared with. How we measure.
All eight scores against the T73
At a glance: the Trilliant Cut in GGG (white) against the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG (dashed): solid white where
it reaches further, hatched where it falls short. Each pro and con is explained, with pictures, below.
Against the T73 Round Brilliant in ggg: ahead on 3, behind on 5.
Global83, the comparison 90, difference −7
Brilliance86, the comparison 98, difference −12
Fire89, the comparison 76, difference +13
Scintillation79, the comparison 80, difference −1
Spread101, the comparison 100, difference +1
Symmetry62, the comparison 100, difference −38
Shape-norm99, the comparison 105, difference −6
Tilt83, the comparison 82, difference +1
Face-up light census, a different measure from the Cut Grading Tool; Spread and Shape-norm above 100 sit on the ring. Spread is the census's estimate from depth alone; the face-up size in the pros and cons is measured from each model's outline. Open it in the Cut Performance Wheel; these are the same census figures as our Cut Performance Index.
What the Trilliant Cut gains in GGG
More fire than the T73 in GGG
Fire 89 against 76 for the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG: 13 points higher
Fire is the share of the returned light that splits into color at the exit facet: the census traces each exit again at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread (0.039 in GGG) and counts a ray as fire when the two directions differ by more than 0.6°. The Trilliant Cut reads 89 against 76 for the T73 in GGG. The figure is the census's; the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders GGG's fire live.
The fire figure is the census's, traced at the refractive index minus and plus the fire spread. See the fire in the 3D Gemstone Simulator: the Trilliant Cut in GGG under the sunny-day lighting.
1.92 ct at 6.5 mm, against 0.96 ct for the same cut in diamond (+100%)
Weight follows specific gravity: 7.05 for GGG against 3.52 for diamond, so the same model at the same size weighs 1.92 ct here and 0.96 ct in diamond, 6.5 mm across. Nothing about the light changes with it.
A Trilliant Cut 6.5 mm across, weighed from the model's measured volume and each stone's specific gravity.
Symmetry 62 against 100 for the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG: 38 points lower
Symmetry reads how evenly the pavilion facets of each design family are cut: 100 − 6 × their scatter in degrees. The Trilliant Cut reads 62, the T73 100. It depends on the geometry alone, so it is the same in every stone.
Trilliant Cut · 70 facets · Symmetry 62
T73 Round Brilliant · 73 facets · Symmetry 100
Symmetry scores how regular the pavilion facets are within the design. Compare how evenly the facets repeat around each pavilion. Drawn from each cut's own model.
Brilliance 86 against 98 for the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG: 12 points lower
Brilliance is the share of the 3,200 census rays that enter the stone and come back out of the crown towards the viewer. In GGG, whose critical angle is 30.5°, the Trilliant Cut returns 86 of 100 and the T73 98. The Trilliant Cut's pavilion mains sit at 39.0°, the T73's at 40.8°. The maps below show where each stone's light returns from and where it leaks.
Trilliant Cut in GGG · Brilliance 86
T73 Round Brilliant in GGG · Brilliance 98
Red, green and blue = light returning to the eye; gray = leakage, light that leaves heading down or stays inside. This is the head-on view; the Brilliance score averages a wider cone of light, so the score can differ from what one picture shows.
Leakage 10 against 2 for the T73 Round Brilliant in GGG: 8 points higher
Leakage is the share of the census rays that enter the stone and leave through the pavilion, or through the crown heading down. The Trilliant Cut leaks 10% in GGG against 2% for the T73 in GGG. Grey in the maps below is leaking light; the share under each picture is that picture's own.
Trilliant Cut in GGG · Leakage 10
0° · 10% leak
10° · 13% leak
20° · 15% leak
30° · 26% leak
T73 Round Brilliant in GGG · Leakage 2
0° · 0% leak
10° · 4% leak
20° · 14% leak
30° · 23% leak
Each frame is the Light Return map with the stone tilted away from you by the angle shown; gray is leakage. The share under each frame is that picture's own.
Pick the Trilliant Cut in GGG for this: it shows more fire than the T73. The catch: it weighs more than in diamond, has a less regular pavilion than the T73, returns less light than the T73 and leaks more light than the T73.
If that catch matters more to you, the DG-Broken Hearts and Arrows reads 98 for brilliance in GGG, the best of the cuts we score there.
Every figure on this page is from our light census, traced at one refractive index: a simulation of the geometry, not a grading report. The 3D files and cutting files below are the same Trilliant Cut model we traced.
Trilliant Cut GGG: questions
Is the Trilliant a good cut for GGG?
In our census the Trilliant Cut returns 86 of 100 for brilliance and 89 for fire in GGG, against 98 and 76 for the T73 in the same stone. Against that round and against the same cut in diamond it has 1 pro and 4 cons by our thresholds; the summary above names them.
What pavilion angle does GGG need?
At least 37.4° for a round design: GGG's critical angle is 30.5°, from the low end of its refractive index range, and head-on light has to reflect off both sides of the pavilion and leave through the table. The Trilliant Cut's pavilion mains sit at 39.0°.
How much does a Trilliant weigh in GGG?
At 6.5 mm across, 1.92 ct in GGG, against 0.96 ct for the same cut in diamond (+100%): GGG's specific gravity is 7.05, diamond's 3.52.
Can I see the Trilliant in GGG in 3D?
Yes: the 3D Gemstone Simulator renders it live, with GGG's own refractive index and dispersion. GGG is traced by the same light census as the other gemstones, with its refractive index and fire spread derived from published values, so its scores are on the same scale; the pictures here are our Light Return tracer, and the Cut Performance Wheel sets it against any other cut and stone.
Get the Trilliant Cut files
6 formatsMillimetersWatertight
Trilliant Cut 3D files
The Trilliant Cut as exact geometry: 72 planar facets, real-world scale, ready for CAD,
rendering, printing and casting.
