Significance of Diamond Depth And Table Percentages

depth and table percentages for diamonds

This Diamond Has a 62.5% Depth

The depth of a diamond is its height (in millimeters) measured from the culet to the table. On a grading report, there are normally two measurements of depth – the first is the actual depth measurement in millimeters (shown under ‘measurements’ at the top of a grading report), and the second is the depth percentage (see image on left), which shows how deep the diamond is in relation to its width. 

Today, the art of polishing diamonds had become somewhat scientific. That said, even though the depth percentage can be a tell tale sign for brilliance and value (stones that are cut too deeply are usually cut to retain weight from the rough), it doesn’t tell the entire story. You will find out why as I explain things in more details.

Extreme Depth Proportions Can Affect Sparkle

The place where that depth lies is also crucial in determining the diamond’s beauty. The pavilion, in particular, should be cut at correct proportions so that light rays can bounce around within the diamond and be reflected out at the proper angle to meet an observer’s eye.

extreme shallowness in depth
total depth over 65

Total depth percentages of 56.6% (left) and 65.9 (right) are recipes for disastrous looks.

The ideal depth percentage varies with the shape of the diamond. A depth percentage that may be too much for one shape might be essential for another. For instance, a princess cut with a 75 or 77 percent depth would still be considered acceptable and can yield an attractive diamond. On the other hand, a depth of 65 percent for a round diamond would be excessive and be detrimental to its beauty.

The Importance of Table Percentages And Values

diamond table percentages

This Diamond has a 54% Table

The table refers to the flat facet of the diamond which can be seen when the stone is face up. It also happens to be the largest facet on a diamond and plays a vital role on brilliance and light performance of a stone.

The main purpose of the table facet is to refract light rays entering the diamond and to allow reflected light rays from the pavilion facets back into the observer’s eye.

It is widely misconceived that a larger table percentage would make a round diamond more brilliant than one with a smaller table. However, this is not the case as there are other factors that contribute to the overall brilliance and fire of a diamond.

Fire is best observed at the bezel facets of a diamond. With a finite amount of space at the crown area, having a larger table would mean that bezel and upper girdle facets would now have less surface area and dispersion decreases. Vice versa, having a small table would allow girdle facets to disperse light more effectively while suffering from issues with brilliance.

It is therefore important to strike a balance between light transmission through the table and color dispersion through the crown and upper girdle facets. As they say, too much of a good thing may do more harm than good.

huge table unsightly
small table high fire

An insanely huge table of 81% will make the stone on the left devoid of dispersion properties.

How is Table Percentage Calculated?

In a grading report, table percentage is calculated based on the size of the table divided by the average girdle diameter of the diamond. So, a 60 percent table means that the table is 60 percent wide as the diamond’s outline.

If a diamond is round, gemologists can compute this value by dividing the table diameter, measured in millimeters by the average girdle diameter. For a consumer, this can easily be calculated based on the average measurements found at a grading report’s top left-hand side.

For fancy shaped diamonds, table percentage is computed by dividing the table width (measured at the widest part of the facet) by the width of the widest part of the stone measured in millimeters. On a grading report, this width is the second of the three values under “Measurements” and is delineated in millimeters.

How to Use Depth And Table Percentages Effectively

Combined, the depth and table percentages of a diamond play a major role on the stone’s beauty. It shows you how the stone has been cut in relation to its proportion and is usually one of the first few values to help you instantly weed out diamonds with less ideal cuts.

While the variations in brilliance and sparkle may be apparent to the eye, the subtleties of proportioning may not be easy to discern.  Here’s the limitations imposed by numbers on a piece of paper. Even if a diamond has values that lie within “ideal” ranges, the diamond still requires additional performance data to determine its cut precision. We’ll show you how to select a diamond correctly in this guide here.

Also, while a diamond’s spread will be affected by its table width, choosing the best personality is a matter of personal taste ultimately.

If you are looking for ideal cut diamonds that are cut to the best proportions and precision, check out and Their signature diamonds are subjected to a stringent quality control process and breathtakingly beautiful!

Related Articles

Sharing Is Caring ! Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Tweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn0Share on Reddit0Share on StumbleUpon0


  1. Kristine-
    January 4, 2015 at 6:48 pm

    I need to replace a stone from an eternity ring. I was told I need a 4.1 mm round stone, S1-I1, g or j color. What would you recommend? Thank you.

  2. Paul Gian-
    January 5, 2015 at 12:23 am

    Doing a proper replacement for a stone from an eternity ring is tricky. It is best to get your jeweler where you bought the diamond to do the the replacement. Basically, you need to match the table size and physical dimensions to the rest of the ring. Without looking at your ring, I can’t make a proper recommendation in this scenario.

  3. Ash-
    January 6, 2016 at 9:18 pm

    Hey Paul… great site! I’ve been told that having a depth value less than table will result in a darker diamond. Is this true? Most other things being equal, would one choose a diamond with greater relative depth or table? I’m comparing two very similar stones, one D61.1/T57 (E) and another D58.5/T62 (F). Thanks!

  4. Paul Gian-
    January 7, 2016 at 3:12 am

    The statement isn’t always true. It depends on a case by case basis.

    From what I can tell, the F diamond isn’t going to perform well. The excessively large table size will result in a fisheye that would be easily observable with a little tilt.

    That said, while the E diamond has decent looking proportions, it is by no means a basis to conclude that the stone is going to be well cut.

  5. Sam-
    February 2, 2016 at 4:22 pm

    Hello Paul,

    I am in the process of buying a diamond and stumbled across your website. You have so much great information. Thanks for making it available for the rest of us.

    I have found a diamond that I think is a good deal. After some reading on your site though, I am afraid that the diamond is cut too deep.

    It is 3.08 (J). The table is 56 and the depth is 62.3. The cut grade is excellent however. Thoughts? Thanks in advance.


  6. Paul Gian-
    February 3, 2016 at 12:05 am
  7. Dany-
    February 9, 2016 at 1:46 am

    Hey i just brought a Radiant Cut ring. But i am thinking about changing the stone. I have some concerns About both the Depth & the table con you tell me some of the pros and cons.

    This is the stone i have now Stone (1)

    SHAPE: Radiant
    CARAT WEIGHT: 1.02
    COLOR: F
    POLISH: Excellent
    SYMMETRY: Very Good
    L/W/D (MM): 6.44*5.22*3.53
    L/W RATIO: 1.23
    DEPTH %: 67.60
    GIRDLE: Slightly Thick – Thick
    TABLE %: 68.00
    CULET: None
    CROWN ∠: 0.00

    This is Stone (2) what i want to change to
    SHAPE: Radiant
    CARAT WEIGHT: 1.02
    COLOR: F
    POLISH: Very Good
    SYMMETRY: Very Good
    L/W/D (MM): 6.13*5.33*4.01
    L/W RATIO: 1.15
    DEPTH %: 75.20
    GIRDLE: Medium
    TABLE %: 59.00
    CULET: None

  8. Paul Gian-
    February 9, 2016 at 3:14 pm

    There’s no way I can objectively answer your question and know which is the better cut diamond. You need to read this in full:

  9. Chris-
    July 1, 2016 at 1:40 pm

    Is it ever a good idea to purchase a diamond with a table width which is larger than the diamond’s depthnin regards to round diamonds. Thanks.

  10. Paul Gian-
    July 1, 2016 at 2:49 pm

    Depends on the diamond’s shape and what you are after. In general, no.

  11. Andrew Gioulis-
    August 17, 2016 at 6:46 pm

    Hi Paul,

    I have a jeweler that is trying to sell me this diamond for $3900:

    BR 1.01 E SI2 EGLNY

    Depth: 62.3
    Table: 59
    Culet: N
    Girdle: TN-STK
    Polish: G
    Sym: G
    Fluor: M
    Cut: G

    Is that a good price?

  12. Paul Gian-
    August 18, 2016 at 5:16 am

    Run! Poorly cut diamond plus a scammy report from EGL is a sure fire way to get ripped off.

  13. Stacy-
    August 29, 2016 at 7:40 pm

    Hi Paul,
    I am upgrading my diamond through the same B&M store I bought it to get full credit. Cut is most important to me. I want an even spread of fire and brilliance. Will either of these perform well individually in various lighting environments and are the prices fair?

    Thanks in advance!

    Measurements: 6.59 – 6.60 x 4.07 mm
    Carat Weight: 1.07 carat
    Color Grade: G
    Clarity Grade: VS2
    Cut Grade: Excellent
    Depth: 61.7 %
    Table: 55 %
    Crown Angle: 34.5°
    Crown Height: 15.5%
    Pavilion Angle: 40.8°
    Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
    Star Length: 55%
    Lower Half: 75%
    Girdle: Thin to Medium, Faceted, 3.5%
    Culet: None

    Measurements: 6.65 – 6.67 x 4.11 mm
    Carat Weight: 1.11 carat
    Color Grade: G
    Clarity Grade: VS1
    Cut Grade: Excellent
    Depth: 61.7 %
    Table: 56 %
    Crown Angle: 35.0°
    Crown Height: 15.5%
    Pavilion Angle: 40.8°
    Pavilion Depth: 43.0%
    Star Length: 50%
    Lower Half: 80%
    Girdle Medium, Faceted, 3.5%
    Culet None

  14. Paul Gian-
    August 30, 2016 at 3:01 am

    On paper, both diamonds are fine by numbers. However, you should not be making decisions based on numbers alone without tangible cut information on the stones.

  15. Chris L-
    September 8, 2016 at 9:45 am

    Hi Paul,

    Thanks so much for the extremely helpful information for beginners like me.

    Grateful if you may let me have your views on the following questions:

    1. A shop is showing me diamonds and what they say are the GIA certificates of these diamonds. Is there any way I could verify that the diamond shown to me is indeed the diamond mentioned in the GIA certificate. Is the “Inscription(s): GIA 2228540824” relevant? If so, where can I find the inscription in the diamond?

    2. I am convinced by you that cutting is the most important aspect. Is the cutting of the diamond GIA 2228540824 (1.20 carat, excellent cutting) brilliant by the numbers of the dimension of the diamond?

    Thank you very much

  16. Kelly-
    September 29, 2016 at 1:14 am

    Hi Paul,
    I am doing a report on diamonds and was given a data set with different buying factors. Among those factors are the depth and table (both as the proportions you describe). I know you want to be around 60, but what is the lowest ratio you can have for depth and table? For example, in our data set we have some observations that have the table of 6 or 126. For depth we have some numbers around 4, are these possible? The majority of our data is around 60, so we are thinking it is a user input error.

    Thank you for your help,

  17. Paul Gian-
    September 29, 2016 at 2:43 am

    Well, your data’s headings are definitely erroneous. There’s no way a table% can be more than 100%. For that matter, I also haven’t seen diamonds cut to table percentages of 6%.

  18. Mim-
    October 24, 2016 at 10:50 pm

    Hi Paul,

    Question: I’m trying to match .4 pointers to make four stone ring.
    Diamonds sourced for me by seller are all GIA triple excellent (have seen certs):

    .41 carat(4.74 x 4.76x 2.96) Table 58%, E,VS1
    .42 carat (4.76 x 4.79x 3.01) table 56% E Si1
    .41 carat (4.71×4.73×2.96) Table 57%, F, VS1
    .41carat (4.75×4.77×2.94) Table 59%, F Si1

    Do you think these would be good match for 4 stones? I’m a little concerned that the difference on table sizes is 3% or maybe that won’t matter on Diamonds this small when placed together. I’m (perhaps incorrectly) not that concerned about the colour and clarity differences as I feel they will not be noticeable and I have a budget to stick to. I am also assuming that the overall performance of the diamonds would be very good given that they are all certified GIA triple Ex. Any help appreciated.


  19. Paul Gian-
    October 25, 2016 at 4:41 am

    Color and clarity won’t matter. However, I can tell you that a couple of diamonds down there with table sizes larger than 57% will never make it pass my own standards if I am buying the ring for myself.

Leave A Comment