RAM comparison Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB vs Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4BL.16FE 16GB

Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB vs Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4BL.16FE 16GB

Overall score

Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Ramaxel Technology RMT3160ED58E9W1600 4GB

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4BL.16FE 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

30 40

Around -33% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

14.9 12.3

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

14.2 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

Crucial Technology BL16G32C16U4BL.16FE 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 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 3332

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