RAM comparison Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Corsair CMK16GX4M2C3600C20 8GB

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Corsair CMK16GX4M2C3600C20 8GB

Overall score

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Reasons to consider
Corsair CMK16GX4M2C3600C20 8GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

27 41

Around -52% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

18.7 13.9

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

15.0 9.7

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

17000 12800

Around 1.33 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Corsair CMK16GX4M2C3600C20 8GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-12800, 1.5V, 1.35V , CAS Supported: 6 7 8 9 10 11 PC4-17000, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24
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)

2366 3530

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