RAM comparison Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Corsair CMZ8GXMA1600C9 512MB

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Corsair CMZ8GXMA1600C9 512MB

Overall score

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

41 61

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

13.9 7.1

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

9.7 4.5

Average value in the tests
Higher memory bandwidth, mbps

12800 1300

Around 9.85% higher bandwidth

Reasons to consider
Corsair CMZ8GXMA1600C9 512MB

Complete list of technical specifications

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Corsair CMZ8GXMA1600C9 512MB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-12800, 1.5V, 1.35V , CAS Supported: 6 7 8 9 10 11 PC3-1300, 1.5V, 1.35V , 1.2X V, CAS Supported: 6 7 8 9
Timings / Clock speed

9-9-9-24 / 1600 MHz no data
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

2366 1243

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