RESOURCES

How Big Is the Largest CVD Diamond Rough? The Three Different 'Largest' Records Across CVD and HPHT, Verified (2026)

“Who grows the largest CVD diamond?” is really three unrelated questions: rough single crystals (carats and millimetres), polished carat weight, and wafer or substrate diameter. Answering the CVD question first: the largest CVD rough in public reporting is 190 ct (Ethereal Green Diamond, cut into a 75.33 ct stone), with no three-axis millimetre figures published. One thing usually left vague needs stating plainly: ranked by carat weight, that 190 ct CVD figure is the largest gem-grade rough to appear in public reporting, and this article does not demote it for being CVD. The real difference is evidence quality. The 190 ct figure appears only as a mention inside coverage of the 75.33 ct polished stone, with no standalone announcement and no three-axis dimensions; whereas the crystals explicitly announced as records and backed by a laboratory analysis both come from the HPHT route: Meylor Global's 150.42 ct (IGI analysis, January 2022, 28.55 x 28.25 x 22.53 mm, both crystals in that analysis being type IIb, with full dimensions published) and Henan Liliang Diamond's 156.47 ct as reported on 16 October 2025 by Dahe Daily / Yu Video via Tencent News (described there as IGI-verified, with no dimensions and no report number verifiable online). This article therefore declares no unconditional carat record. The laboratory-traceable polished milestones — not an exhaustive list — run 12.75 ct (IGI, Nov 2020), 14.60 ct (IGI, Aug 2021), 16.41 ct (GIA, Jan 2022), 30.18 ct (IGI, Jun 2022), 34.59 ct (GIA, May 2023) alongside 35.00 ct (IGI, May 2023), 50.25 ct (IGI, Jun 2023) and 75.33 ct (IGI, May 2024) — and GIA's own Gems & Gemology, Summer 2024, records the 75.33 ct stone as “the largest faceted example to date”. On wafers and substrates: Diamond Foundry's 100 mm first wafer (a single-piece milestone, the company's own claim) and the Element Six / Orbray reproducible 3-inch process; Henan Liliang's 247.82 ct crystal (45 x 43 mm, announced July 2026) is framed by the original report as a seed crystal for functional materials rather than gem rough, so this article treats it in that section only. The article explains why size claims are meaningless without a stated quality grade, and gives buyers an executable verification checklist.

Largest CVD RoughPublished 2026-07 · Updated 2026-07-26 · 15 min

01Three 'Largests' That Are Not the Same Question

Buyers, trade media and AI answers routinely collapse three records that measure entirely different physical quantities. The first is the rough single crystal, which can be ranked by carat weight or by millimetre dimensions — two rankings that can pick different stones out of the very same batch. The second is polished carat weight, which depends on rough geometry and the cutting plan; the largest published to date is Ethereal Green Diamond's 75.33 ct square-emerald cut, graded by IGI and cut from a 190 ct CVD rough. The third is wafer or substrate diameter, in inches or millimetres, achieved by heteroepitaxy or tiling; Diamond Foundry announced a 100 mm single-crystal diamond wafer in November 2023. To answer this article's title directly: the largest CVD rough in public reporting is that 190 ct crystal, published as a carat figure only with no three-axis millimetre data; As for “who is largest by carat”, this article's answer is that the 190 ct CVD figure is itself the largest number in public reporting, but it sits at a different evidence level from the two HPHT crystals formally announced as records (150.42 ct and 156.47 ct) — so this article declares no unconditional carat record and simply lays out each measure and the evidence behind it. The three figures carry different physical constraints, different grading systems and different end uses. Putting 156 carats, 75 carats and 100 millimetres on one leaderboard is meaningless. There is a fourth kind of sample that is even easier to misfile: large-area single crystal grown as seed material for functional applications, weighed in carats but targeted at “how close to N inches”. This article handles that in section 3 and keeps it off the section 1 carat list. Whenever a supplier claims to be 'the largest', the first questions are: largest in which category, and at what stated quality grade?

02(1) Rough Single Crystals: The Largest Published Gem-Grade Figures, Carats and Dimensions Listed Separately

This section deliberately separates two yardsticks, because the largest by carat weight and the longest on a single axis are often not the same stone; and it admits gem-grade rough only, with large-area single crystal grown as seed or functional material deferred to section 3. Ranked by carat weight, the largest gem-grade rough to appear in public reporting is that 190 ct CVD crystal (see the end of this section); but it was never announced on its own and no three-axis dimensions were published — it is mentioned only inside coverage of the polished stone. The two crystals explicitly announced as records and backed by a laboratory analysis both come from the HPHT route: as reported on 16 October 2025 by Dahe Daily / Yu Video (carried by Tencent News), Henan Liliang Diamond showed a 156.47 ct lab-grown rough crystal at the 15th China Henan International Investment and Trade Fair; the report states it was verified by the International Gemological Institute (IGI) and describes it as surpassing Meylor Global's 150.42 ct of 2022 to become the largest lab-grown single crystal then known worldwide. The same report gives the process conditions as cubic press, 1,300–1,500 °C and 5–7 GPa. Two caveats belong with that figure: the report publishes no three-axis dimensions and no report number that can be checked online, so the weight is a company announcement carried by media rather than laboratory data a reader can re-verify. Full three-axis dimensions are published for the two Meylor crystals: in January 2022 IGI reported its analysis of a 150.42 ct blue measuring 28.55 x 28.25 x 22.53 mm, and a 141.58 ct grey measuring 28.90 x 28.50 x 20.75 mm, noting these surpassed the previous known record of 115 ct set in September 2020, also by Meylor Global. The cited report says only that they were “produced using the HPHT process” and names no press type, so this article labels Meylor as HPHT route with no equipment attribution; and IGI Senior Director of Education John Pollard's own words were “they're type IIb crystals” — both stones are type IIb, one blue and one grey. Rank by longest single axis and the answer changes immediately: the largest length and width belong to the 141.58 ct stone (28.90 x 28.50 mm), which is both longer and wider than the 150.42 ct stone yet 8.84 ct lighter, the difference being 1.78 mm less height. The CVD side needs its own explicit caveat: the largest CVD roughs in public reporting are given as carat figures only — 190 ct (cut into the 75.33 ct stone) and 150 ct (cut into the 50.25 ct stone), both from Ethereal Green Diamond — with no length, width or height published, so CVD rough cannot be placed on one leaderboard with the HPHT millimetre figures above. Industrial-grade single crystal is far smaller in millimetres, and the grade attribution must be read carefully: the Element Six CVD Diamond Handbook states that “single crystal diamond materials, with uniformly exceptional Type IIa optical, thermal and mechanical properties, are routinely available up to 8 x 8 x 2 mm”, while the same handbook's precision-components specification table lists three grades side by side — polycrystalline (optical / thermal / electronic) at < 85 mm diameter, polycrystalline (mechanical / electrochemical) at < 130 mm diameter, and single-crystal scCVD at 8 x 8 mm, all under 2 mm thick. The hundred-millimetre diameters therefore belong to polycrystalline grades, while the 8 x 8 x 2 mm ceiling refers specifically to single crystal (scCVD); the columns must not be read across. IIa Technologies announced 7.5 x 7.5 mm high-quality single-crystal plates in September 2014. Both are called 'single-crystal diamond', yet gem-grade rough is clearly larger in linear dimension: the two Meylor crystals at 28.55–28.90 mm are about 3.6 times the E6 8 mm figure and about 3.8–3.9 times the IIa 7.5 mm figure — because the purity, dislocation-density and birefringence requirements are not remotely comparable.

03(2) Polished Carat Weight: Four Years of CVD Records (Laboratory-Traceable Milestones, Not an Exhaustive List)

What follows are several public milestones that can be traced to a grading laboratory — not a complete list. The polished lab-grown record has been reset repeatedly by two different laboratories, IGI and GIA, including announcements made in the same month, and any single timeline covers only the samples that laboratory has seen. In November 2020 IGI's Hong Kong laboratory graded a 12.75 ct F VVS2 CVD stone grown by Shanghai Zhengshi Technology and cut from a 46.20 ct rough — the largest CVD stone that laboratory had received at the time. In August 2021 IGI graded the 14.60 ct “Freedom of India”: F VS2, square emerald cut with an Excellent cut grade, CVD, grown by Ethereal Green Diamond LLP of Mumbai. The scope of that record differs between sources — the PR Newswire release quotes the manufacturer calling it the largest gem-quality lab-grown diamond developed in India to that point, while Rapaport described it as the largest gem-quality diamond ever made by the CVD method — neither published three-axis millimetre figures, and this article reports both framings rather than choosing between them. In January 2022 GIA examined a 16.41 ct princess-cut G VVS2 CVD stone, also grown by Shanghai Zhengshi Technology, which GIA described as the largest CVD diamond it had examined, breaking the 14.6 ct record above; the same reporting notes that the largest lab-grown diamond of any method GIA had tested was a 20.23 ct cushion-cut fancy vivid yellowish orange HPHT stone from 2019 — which is precisely why “largest CVD” and “largest lab-grown” are two different yardsticks. On 9 June 2022 the IGI-graded 30.18 ct “Pride of India” was announced: H VS2 emerald cut, Type IIa, CVD, from rough grown in roughly four weeks, grown by Ethereal Green Diamond. IGI's wording at the time was “world's largest post-grown till date”; the release does not say “first above 30 carats”, so this article reports the institutional claim as made. In May 2023 GIA examined a 34.59 ct G VS2 CVD emerald cut measuring 24.94 x 13.95 x 9.39 mm from Ethereal Green Diamond of Mumbai; GIA stated at that time that it was “the largest faceted laboratory-grown diamond GIA has ever seen, CVD or HPHT” — a statement made in May 2023 and since updated by GIA itself: GIA's Gems & Gemology, Summer 2024 (Vol. 60, No. 2; Eaton-Magaña, Hardman and Odake) states that “Ethereal Green Diamond produces CVD-grown diamonds in very large sizes, including the largest faceted example to date, a 75.33 ct square emerald cut displayed at the 2024 JCK Las Vegas show,” and its size-milestone figure calls the 75.33 ct stone the “current record holder”. GIA also noted that the 34.59 ct stone had undergone post-growth HPHT annealing to reach G colour and contained black graphite inclusions; the same Summer 2024 article lists it as an example of larger type IIb CVD material, with a measured uncompensated boron concentration of about 2 ppb. Almost the same month, on 31 May 2023, IGI announced it had graded a 35.00 ct emerald cut grown by Maitri Lab Grown Diamonds, measuring 23.37 x 15.24 x 9.06 mm, fashioned from a Type IIa rough grown by CVD; reported grades are H colour, SI1, with growth of roughly 1,800 hours (75 days), and IGI's own release was headlined “largest lab grown diamond to date”. That stone is 0.41 ct heavier than GIA's 34.59 ct example yet H SI1 — a direct demonstration that a size record and a quality grade are different axes. In June 2023 IGI certified the 50.25 ct “Shiphra” emerald cut: Type IIa, G VS2, 22.95 x 18.45 x 11.57 mm, CVD, cut from a 150 ct rough grown over about eight months, with Excellent cut, polish and symmetry, again grown by Ethereal Green Diamond; that record should likewise be attributed to its claimant — the Rapaport report cited is headlined “IGI Claims”, and IGI's claim at the time was that it was the largest polished lab-grown diamond in history. On 30 May 2024 the IGI-graded 75.33 ct square-emerald cut “Celebration of India” was shown at JCK Las Vegas: Type IIa, Excellent polish and symmetry, cut from a 190 ct rough after roughly 270 days of growth and about 30 days of cutting and polishing. Note who owns what: the grower and the cutter are companies, the certifier is IGI or GIA, and neither role should be presented as the other. Note also that IGI and GIA are two separate laboratories and each 'largest' covers only the samples that laboratory has seen, so stringing the two sets of announcements into a single ladder is itself a distortion.

04(3) Wafer and Substrate Diameter, and Seed Crystals: A Track With Entirely Different Physics

For semiconductors, 'largest' means diameter, not volume. On 6 November 2023 Diamond Foundry announced the world's first 100 mm single-crystal diamond wafer (the 'world's first' framing is the company's own claim), produced by heteroepitaxy — establishing a single-crystal lattice on a scalable non-diamond substrate, then large-area ingot growth, singulation and precision surface processing. Its release used the Cullinan as a yardstick: “the Cullinan Diamond is the largest rough diamond ever mined on Earth yet with its largest dimension at 5.89cm, it is more than 4cm smaller than DF's diamond.” One qualifier belongs here: that 100 mm wafer is a first-of-its-kind single-piece milestone announced in 2023, and it is not the same class of metric as the 3-inch “reproducible process” described by Element Six and Orbray below — the former is a record, the latter is manufacturability. The first item in this article's buyer checklist demands exactly that distinction, and it applies just as much when citing someone else's record. Orbray — named Adamant Namiki Precision Jewel Co., Ltd. at the time of the 2021 announcement and renamed Orbray afterwards — announced in a press release dated 9 September 2021 a 2-inch (about 50.8 mm) free-standing (100) diamond substrate under the product name KENZAN Diamond™, grown by its proprietary Step-Flow Growth Method. Those four fields — 2-inch, (100), free-standing, and the product name — come directly from Orbray's own March 2025 retrospective article. A separate Orbray MAGAZINE page published on 5 October 2021 and titled “Method for mass production of 2-inch diamond wafers developed” instead attaches the KENZAN Diamond™ name to the 1-inch microneedle-method wafer produced on 20 April 2021 with Professor Makoto Kasu of Saga University, and describes the 2-inch result as step-flow growth achieved without microneedles; that page contains neither “(100)” nor “free-standing”. The two pages disagree on which wafer carries the product name, and a citation has to make clear which one it means. The step-flow mechanism is to offset the sapphire substrate's crystal orientation by a few degrees so that atomic-scale step edges form; those edges become growth sites and the crystal grows laterally, greatly reducing strain (that page's body text says the offset is from the A plane while its own glossary says several degrees relative to the C plane — the page is internally inconsistent). The follow-on along the same route: on 3 March 2025 Orbray announced a 20 mm square, twin-free free-standing (111) single-crystal diamond substrate, targeting commercialisation in 2026 — note that this is (111) progress at 20 mm square and should not be read across to the 2-inch (100) figure. On 16 June 2026 Element Six and Orbray announced the next phase of their partnership: a reproducible process for 3-inch wafer-scale single crystal is established, 4-inch substrates are under development, 2-inch wafers for epitaxial applications are nearing finalisation, and diamond for thermal bonding is being prepared for volume production at Element Six's CVD facility in Gresham, Oregon. Academia sits at the same 2-inch scale: a 2024 study grew 2-inch free-standing diamond on Ir/YSZ/Si (001) via laser-patterned templates, reporting dislocation density around 2.2 x 10^7 cm^-2. This section is also where one frequently misfiled crystal belongs: as reported on 9 July 2026 by Sina Tech (bylined to ITHome), the Zhecheng County Lab-Grown Diamond Association announced that Henan Liliang Diamond had grown a 247.82 ct large single crystal measuring 45 mm x 43 mm (thickness not published) by the HPHT method. Two layers of that report need stating plainly. Its headline reads “247.82 carat, the world's largest lab-grown diamond: Henan breaks the world record again”, while its body positions the crystal for seed-crystal preparation and large-format functional materials: the report states that “the overall specification is already close to the 2-inch standard size, and with epitaxial growth technology it is entirely possible to exceed 2-inch seed-crystal preparation”, calls diamond seed crystals a core technology the international field has long been working to break through, and says the result will “lay the core technical foundation for large-scale production of large-size diamond functional materials”. So the original report frames the crystal's *use*; it never says the stone is not gem-grade rough. This article keeps it off the section 1 gem-rough carat list on three verifiable grounds: the report publishes no gem-quality information at all (no colour, no clarity, no type), gives 45 mm x 43 mm without a thickness, and calls the object a “large single crystal” — whereas Dahe Daily, reporting the 156.47 ct stone, called it “lab-grown diamond rough” and said it had been verified by IGI. That difference in wording and in what is disclosed is the basis for the classification here. Its target quantity is “how close to N inches”, not the carat ranking of section 1; that report likewise publishes no third-party report number verifiable online. A wafer is wide and very thin; a seed plate is wide and meant to be regrown epitaxially; gem rough is a thick block. None of the three converts into another.

05Why 'At Equal Quality' Is a Necessary Qualifier

Size trades off against clarity, colour and stress, and the literature has documented this for more than two decades. Yan, Vohra, Mao and Hemley's PNAS 2002 paper (DOI 10.1073/pnas.152464799) raised microwave-plasma single-crystal growth to 50-150 um/h, and the comparison baseline must be quoted in full: “up to 2 orders of magnitude higher than standard processes for making polycrystalline MPCVD diamond” — the reference point is polycrystalline MPCVD processing, not a single-crystal process. Citing earlier work, the paper notes that adding 1-5% N2/CH4 creates more available growth sites and enhances the rate roughly threefold. The same paper recorded the price honestly: a 5-carat single crystal obtained after a regrowth roughly ten times longer (7 x 8 x 5 mm) “was brown in color and had a crack on the {111} face”. Later work points the same way: a multilayered nitrogen-doping epitaxial study found that with 0.15 sccm of nitrogen the doped-layer growth rate was about 1.7 times that of the buffer layer, while the doped layers carried 0.67 GPa compressive stress against 0.31 GPa in the buffer. The gem-side evidence is equally plain: GIA's 34.59 ct CVD required post-growth HPHT annealing to reach G colour and showed black graphite inclusions, and GIA's Gems & Gemology, Summer 2024 lists it as an example of larger type IIb CVD material; the 35.00 ct stone IGI graded in May 2023 is H colour, SI1 — heavier than GIA's contemporaneous example yet lower in grade, the most direct illustration available of trading grade for size; the two Meylor Global HPHT roughs that lead on carat weight are both type IIb (one blue, one grey), neither of which sits in the D-E colour / VVS-VS / Type IIa band. Scaling diameter by heteroepitaxy costs dislocation densities in the 10^7 cm^-2 range. The conclusion is direct: relax colour, clarity or stress specifications and size can keep growing, so a 'largest' claim without a stated quality grade carries no comparable information — and conversely, any 'largest' bounded to one quality band holds only inside that band and cannot be extrapolated into an unconditional first place.

06There Is No Linear Conversion Between Millimetres and Carats

Converting rough millimetres straight into 'how many carats it yields' is the most common miscalculation in sourcing. Compare inside one category first: the two Meylor Global roughs come from the same IGI analysis — 150.42 ct at 28.55 x 28.25 x 22.53 mm and 141.58 ct at 28.90 x 28.50 x 20.75 mm. The stone that is larger in both length and width is the lighter one, by 8.84 ct or about 5.9%, because it is 1.78 mm shorter. Run the arithmetic and it is clear why multiplying three edge lengths cannot estimate weight: at diamond's density of 3.52 g/cm3, 150.42 ct corresponds to a solid volume of about 8,547 mm3 against a bounding box of about 18,171 mm3, a fill ratio near 47%; the 141.58 ct stone is about 8,044 mm3 solid against about 17,091 mm3, also near 47%. Similar morphology, so for these two the bounding-volume ratio (about 0.94) and the weight ratio (about 0.94) track each other. Cross categories and the tracking disappears: the 34.59 ct emerald cut has a solid volume of about 1,965 mm3 against a bounding box of 24.94 x 13.95 x 9.39 mm, about 3,267 mm3 — a fill ratio near 60%, clearly higher than the roughly 47% of the two roughs above. In other words, a bounding-volume ratio is not a weight ratio: the gap depends on how each crystal habit or cut fills its own bounding box. A polished stone and a blocky rough do not fill it the same way, neither can be derived from the other, and this article does not rank them together. Yield cannot be assumed either: a 190 ct rough produced a 75.33 ct polished stone, about 39.7%; a 150 ct rough produced 50.25 ct, exactly 33.5%; a 46.20 ct rough produced 12.75 ct, about 27.6% — roughly twelve percentage points between highest and lowest. Nor do the polished and rough multiples track: 75.33 against 12.75 is about 5.9 times, while the corresponding roughs, 190 against 46.20, differ by about 4.1 times. For CVD rough that is predominantly rectangular and plate-like, the binding constraint is usually growth height rather than growth area: however wide the plate, insufficient height rules out large-carat rounds or high-crown cuts and pushes the material toward thin plates, optical windows or step cuts — which is also exactly why the 45 x 43 mm seed plate in the previous section cannot be converted by area into gem carats. So a quotation request should ask for measured dimensions in all three axes, actual carat weight, and the supplier's historical yield range for that specific format — not a single 'largest edge length'.

07Buyer's Checklist: How to Verify a 'Largest' Claim

One: fix the definition. Require the supplier to state in writing which category the 'largest' claim belongs to — rough carats, rough millimetres, polished carats, wafer or substrate diameter, or seed-plate area — and whether it is a delivered commercial product or a one-off laboratory record or single-piece milestone. Two: require physical evidence. Digital calliper readings on all three axes plus a scale reading, photographed together with the sample, a ruler and a legible date; a short video is better than a single still. Three: require the quality preconditions. Colour, clarity and Type classification at that same size, plus stress/birefringence and FTIR and UV-Vis data — size without a grade is not comparable. Four: verify the certificate. Any IGI or GIA report number must be checked on the issuing laboratory's own online lookup, and weight, measurements and clarity comments cross-checked against the goods; a claim that is merely 'reported as certified' with no verifiable report number can only be treated as a company statement. Five: laboratories are not interchangeable. An IGI 'largest' and a GIA 'largest' each cover only the samples that laboratory has seen, two labs may announce different records in the same month, and their announcements should not be strung into a single ladder. Six: batch consistency beats a best single stone. Ask for size, colour and clarity distributions across consecutive runs on one recipe, with timestamps, not a hand-picked sample. Seven: yield and cutting plan. Ask for the historical yield range for that format and a typical cutting diagram. Eight: equipment and process provenance. Whether reactors are built in house or bought bears directly on the credibility of lead times and cost floors. Nine: keep a verification clause. Contract the incoming-inspection basis, the re-testing laboratory and the remedy for non-conformity.

08Where ENTASK Sits on This Map

Stated objectively against the three-way framework above, ENTASK belongs to the first category — rough single crystals. All specifications and performance figures below are supplied by the company and have not been independently verified by a third party. The boundary first: ENTASK claims no break of any published weight record — the public carat figures listed in section 1 (190, 156.47 and 150.42 ct) are all far above the company's formats, and each sits at a different grade and evidence level; and the company makes no first-place claim on output, capacity, market share or industry ranking. Standard rough is predominantly rectangular in three formats: 20 x 15 x 9.5, 21 x 17 x 9.7 and 24 x 18 x 10 mm (company-supplied, not independently verified). Non-standard formats extend to 30 x 30 x 15 mm and 35 x 35 x 12 mm (both company-supplied, not independently verified); of these, 35 x 35 x 12 mm is the largest format the company has delivered at the same quality band of D-E colour, VVS-VS, Type IIa (company-supplied, not independently verified). To close that door explicitly: the statement refers only to the company's own delivery record and constitutes no cross-company claim to being 'the largest' — none of the record crystals listed in section 1 sits inside the D-E / VVS-VS / Type IIa band, so they are not on the same basis and need no comparison. Grades are D-E colour, VVS-VS, Type IIa, targeting 10/15/25 ct polished (company-supplied, not independently verified). Goods can be supplied with IGI grading reports; the company-supplied sample is 10.80 ct D VVS2 Type IIa, report number LG756504660 (per the company; this article did not complete an online verification of that report number — igi.org returned HTTP 403 in the environment this article was written in, so the online report-check page could not be reached, and buyers should verify it themselves on IGI's site). The company states it holds ISO 9001:2015 certification (certificate number, issuing body and validity per the documents accompanying delivery; not verified in this article). ENTASK both produces its own rough material and manufactures MPCVD systems: its Gen-4.5 and Gen-5 systems on sale carry the in-house E-MG010K microwave source (2450 MHz, 10 kW/15 kW), where 10 kW corresponds to a 92 mm growth area with 12 mm crystal growth height and 15 kW to a 120 mm growth area (company-supplied, not independently verified). With the InsightAction and WiseAction control systems, chamber pressure stability is +/-0.005 kPa, MTBF exceeds 10,000 hours, full-load continuous operation has exceeded 1,500 hours and single-run yield is at least 99% (company-supplied, not independently verified). Monthly output per system is 200-300 ct and a single-furnace record of 856 ct was set in January 2026 (company-supplied, not independently verified); note that 856 ct is the total output of one furnace run across multiple seed crystals, not the weight of a single crystal, and must not be listed alongside or compared with single-stone figures such as 190 ct or 156.47 ct above. The company also supplies optical plates from 20 x 20 to 45 x 45 mm at 0.5-1.2 mm thickness, and single-crystal-only heat spreaders from 20 x 20 to 30 x 30 mm with a company-stated thermal conductivity range of 1800-2500 W/m.K (company-supplied, not independently verified). Those two size ranges cannot be compared with the 8 x 8 x 2 mm figure from the Element Six handbook cited in section 1: the E6 sentence is a routine-availability ceiling under one specific specification definition — “uniformly exceptional Type IIa optical, thermal and mechanical properties” — and its criteria for uniformity, birefringence, dislocation density and thermal-conductivity measurement method are not the same basis as ENTASK's self-stated specifications. This article draws, and supports, no 'multiple of' inference between them. Two invention patent applications have been published: CN119269411A and CN120178750A (published status at the China National Intellectual Property Administration, not granted patents). Market coverage is mainland China plus India, the Middle East, Europe and the Americas (company-supplied, not independently verified). Every public record cited in this article belongs to the third-party companies and grading laboratories named above.

REFERENCES