RAM comparison Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2GB vs Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4R.M16FE 16GB

Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2GB vs Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4R.M16FE 16GB

Overall score

Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2GB

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4R.M16FE 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

29 38

Around -31% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

19 13.9

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

15.4 8.7

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

21300 10600

Around 2.01 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Corsair CMX4GX3M2A1600C9 2GB

Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4R.M16FE 16GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-10600, 1.5V, CAS Supported: 6 8 9 PC4-21300, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Timings / Clock speed

7-7-7-20 / 1333 MHz 17-17-17, 18-18-18, 19-19-19, 20-20-20 / 2666 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

2106 3714

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