RAM comparison Crucial Technology CT25664BA160B.C16F 2GB vs Kingston 9905625-011.A00G 8GB

Crucial Technology CT25664BA160B.C16F 2GB vs Kingston 9905625-011.A00G 8GB

Overall score

Crucial Technology CT25664BA160B.C16F 2GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology CT25664BA160B.C16F 2GB

Reasons to consider
Kingston 9905625-011.A00G 8GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

24 29

Around -21% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

15.9 14.3

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

12.4 10.1

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

17000 12800

Around 1.33 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Crucial Technology CT25664BA160B.C16F 2GB

Kingston 9905625-011.A00G 8GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-12800, 1.5V, CAS Supported: 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 PC4-17000, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 9 11 12 13 14 15 16
Timings / Clock speed

9-9-9-24 / 1600 MHz 14-14-14, 15-15-15, 16-16-16 / 2133 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

2227 2915

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