RAM comparison Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB vs Essencore Limited IM4AGU88N26-GIIHA0 16GB

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB vs Essencore Limited IM4AGU88N26-GIIHA0 16GB

Overall score

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Reasons to consider
Essencore Limited IM4AGU88N26-GIIHA0 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

51 104

Around -104% lower latency
Faster write speed, GB/s

9.8 2,404.5

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

21300 6400

Around 3.33 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Samsung M395T2863QZ4-CF76 1GB

Essencore Limited IM4AGU88N26-GIIHA0 16GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC-6400, PS1: 1.5V, PS2: 1.8V, CAS Supported: 4 5 6 PC4-21300, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Timings / Clock speed

no data 17-17-17, 18-18-18, 19-19-19, 20-20-20 / 2666 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

786 2336

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