Loading...
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 scores 8.2/9.8 and Tirtir Ceramic Milk Ampoule scores 8.2/9.8 — a near-tie where your skin type decides the winner.
These two are neck and neck — just 0.0 points apart.
Scores last verified: April 2026
23 unique
8 in common
41 unique
These two exfoliants take different paths to a similar destination. Both formulas include solid hydrating ingredients, and the overall scores reflect that — the gap here is genuinely slim.
Active Ingredient Strength is another area of separation. Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 scores 6.3 here versus 5.6 for Tirtir Ceramic Milk Ampoule. That difference comes down to how each formula is built — the ingredient list tells the story.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 brings Niacinamide, Allantoin, and Gluconolactone as actives, while tirtir Ceramic Milk Ampoule relies on Niacinamide, Prunus Amygdalus Dulcis (Sweet Almond) Seed Extract, and Avena Sativa (Oat) Meal Extract. Both approaches have merit, but the positioning and supporting ingredients make the difference.
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 is better if you have
Tirtir Ceramic Milk Ampoule is better if you have
Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 comes in at mid-range pricing with a 8.2 score, which is solid value at that tier.
It's a close call — both products score within 0.3 points of each other. Your choice depends on your specific skin concerns.
Based on ingredient analysis, Medicube Zero Pore Pad 2.0 scores higher overall. See the full score breakdown above for details on each attribute.
Yes, they share common ingredients. Check the ingredient face-off section above for a detailed comparison.
The key differences are in their active ingredients and formulation approach. Check the attribute battle above for a detailed breakdown.
Some links on this site are affiliate links. We may earn a commission from purchases made through our links, at no extra cost to you. This helps us keep Gracie free and independent.
© 2026 Gracie. All rights reserved. Data sourced from Open Beauty Facts (ODbL) and EU CosIng.