RAM comparison Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB vs Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB vs Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Overall score

Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB

Reasons to consider
Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

31 40

Around -29% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

16.9 12.3

Average value in the tests
Faster write speed, GB/s

15.0 7.8

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

21300 12800

Around 1.66 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB

Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-12800, 1.5V, CAS Supported: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PC4-21300, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Timings / Clock speed

9-9-9-24 / 1600 MHz 17-17-17, 18-18-18, 19-19-19, 20-20-20 / 2666 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

1806 3522

RAM Latency Calculator

Calculate Ram speed clock interval in nanosecond format

RAM 1

CAS Latency (CL) *

Frequency (Mhz) *

Absolute Latency

0 ns

RAM 2

CAS Latency (CL) *

Frequency (Mhz) *

Absolute Latency

0 ns