G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 vs Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB
Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB has the lower true latency of the two at 8.89 ns, against 9.00 ns for G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18. The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so what follows compares specifications alone.
| Specification | G.SkillTrident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 | KingstonFURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 32 | 32 |
| Speed (MT/s) | 4000better | 3600 |
| 18 | 16 | |
| True latency (ns) | 9.00 | 8.89better |
| Current best price | — | — |
| Price per GB | — | — |
Neither kit has a tracked price at the moment. Nothing has been captured that this page will stand behind, so the price rows stay empty rather than carrying a stale figure.
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 vs Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB in detail
True latency
Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB is the lower-latency kit at 8.89 ns, against 9.00 ns for G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 — a difference of 0.11 ns. That figure is what reconciles the two spec sheets: CAS latency counts clock cycles, so it only means something next to the clock it counts. G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 runs 4000 MT/s at CL18; Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB runs 3600 MT/s at CL16.
Transfer rate
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 is rated 4000 MT/s against 3600 MT/s for Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB — 32000 MB/s per module, against 28800 MB/s. That is peak transfer rate, not access time: reaching a higher clock costs more cycles on each access, which is why the CAS numbers differ too, and why the true latency above is the figure that compares directly.
Kit layout
G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 ships as 2 × 16GB and Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB — the same number of sticks either way, so both populate a board's slots identically.
Lighting, timings and ECC
On the lighting question: G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 is published with RGB lighting, and Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB does not have RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple, the numbers that follow CAS: G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 does not publish one, and Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB runs 16-20-20. On error correction: the catalog does not state whether G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 supports it, and Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB is published with no ECC. Whether ECC is worth having depends on the platform as much as the modules — the board and the CPU have to support it too.
Which to buy
At least one of these kits has no tracked price right now, so this page has no buying answer to give: which is worth more depends on what each costs, and that is exactly what is missing. On specifications alone, Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB has the lower true latency at 8.89 ns.
Common questions about this pair
- Is G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 faster than Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB?
- Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB is, on true latency: 8.89 ns against 9.00 ns. G.Skill Trident Z Neo DDR4-4000 2x16GB CL18 runs 4000 MT/s at CL18 and Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB runs 3600 MT/s at CL16; the CAS numbers alone do not settle it, because they count clock cycles rather than time.
- Which of these two should I buy?
- At least one of these kits has no tracked price right now, so this page has no buying answer to give: which is worth more depends on what each costs, and that is exactly what is missing. On specifications alone, Kingston FURY Renegade DDR4-3600 2x16GB has the lower true latency at 8.89 ns.