RAM comparison Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB vs Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Overall score

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Overall score

Differences Specifications Comments

Reasons to consider
Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Reasons to consider
Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Below the latency in the PassMark tests, ns

31 41

Around -32% lower latency
Faster reading speed, GB/s

16.9 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

21300 12800

Around 1.66 higher bandwidth

Complete list of technical specifications

Crucial Technology CT51264BD160B.C16F 4GB

Kingston XN205T-MIE 16GB

Main characteristics

Other

Description

PC3-12800, 1.5V, 1.35V , CAS Supported: 6 7 8 9 10 11 PC4-21300, 1.2V, CAS Supported: 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Timings / Clock speed

9-9-9-24 / 1600 MHz 17-17-17, 18-18-18, 19-19-19, 20-20-20 / 2666 MHz
Ranking PassMark (The more the better)

2366 3522

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