RAM comparison Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB vs Kingston 99U5625-015.A00G 16GB

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB vs Kingston 99U5625-015.A00G 16GB

Overall score

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Reasons to consider
Kingston 99U5625-015.A00G 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

84 104

Around -24% lower latency
Faster write speed, GB/s

7.2 2,404.5

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

19200 6400

Around 3 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Kingston 99U5625-015.A00G 16GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC-6400, PS1: 1.5V, PS2: 1.8V, CAS Supported: 4 5 6 PC4-19200, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Timings / Clock speed

no data 15-15-15, 16-16-16, 17-17-17, 18-18-18 / 2400 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

786 1614

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