To answer the question first - in my opinion the answer is yes. Read on...
After reading lots of posts on the Sinn forum about removing the outer AR (anti reflective) coating from the crystal due to visible scratches, here some thoughts about the advertising nonsense of a "hardened" AR coating.
AR coatings are used to increase the readability of the watch dial under oblique angles, an optical good AR coating can even make the crystal invisible under certain view angles. But - as many of us know from bad experience - the gain in readability is bought by a gain in scratchability.
Some watch companies advertise now that the AR coating on the crystal is "hardened" (e.g. Sinn and Mido). Hardness values of "1800 Vickers" are advertised. Impressive high numbers, but for measuring the scratch resistance these values are unfortunately nearly useless. The Vickers hardness or other quantified metallurgical hardness tests (Brinell, Rockwell, Knoop) test the resistance against deformation by static penetration. We all know that a scratch does not result from an action that can be described as static penetration.
Actually there is no quantified test or scale for scratch resistance, apart from the Mohs hardness scale dating back to 1822 and used by mineralogists to determine the relative hardness of minerals by scratching. Using the Mohs scale, mineral glass has a relative hardness of about 5.5 to 6, sapphire has a relative hardness of 9 (Diamond is hardest at 10).
An AR coating on a sapphire crystal consists of multiple very thin layers of rare earth metal salts, applied in a process similar to PVD (to keep it simple). These materials do have Mohs hardnesses in the range of 6 (rarely 7). Thus the scratch resistance of an AR coated sapphire is basically back down to the scratch resistance of mineral glass. Regardless what impressive "Vickers hardness" the AR coating might have.