RAM comparison Crucial Technology CT51264BA1339.C16F 4GB vs Neo Forza NMUD480E86-3200 8GB

Crucial Technology CT51264BA1339.C16F 4GB vs Neo Forza NMUD480E86-3200 8GB

Overall score

Crucial Technology CT51264BA1339.C16F 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology CT51264BA1339.C16F 4GB

Reasons to consider
Neo Forza NMUD480E86-3200 8GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

24 27

Around -13% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

20.1 13.9

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

16.1 8.4

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

19200 10600

Around 1.81 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Crucial Technology CT51264BA1339.C16F 4GB

Neo Forza NMUD480E86-3200 8GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-10600, 1.5V, CAS Supported: 6 8 9 PC4-19200, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
Timings / Clock speed

7-7-7-20 / 1333 MHz 15-15-15, 16-16-16, 17-17-17, 18-18-18 / 2400 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

2251 3778

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