ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB vs KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28
On true latency KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 comes out ahead: 9.33 ns, where ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB takes 10.00 ns. No current price is tracked for at least one of the two, so the comparison below is of specifications rather than cost.
| Specification | ADATAXPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB | KLEVVFIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 32 | 32 |
| Speed (MT/s) | 6400better | 6000 |
| 32 | 28 | |
| True latency (ns) | 10.00 | 9.33better |
| Current best price | $1,027.89at Amazon.ca · captured 2026-09-12 | — |
| Price per GB | $32.12 | — |
No tracked price for KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 at the moment. Nothing has been captured for it that this page will stand behind, so its price cells stay empty rather than carrying a stale figure.
ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB vs KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 in detail
True latency
KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 is the lower-latency kit at 9.33 ns, against 10.00 ns for ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB — a difference of 0.67 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. ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB runs 6400 MT/s at CL32; KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 runs 6000 MT/s at CL28.
Transfer rate
ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB is rated 6400 MT/s against 6000 MT/s for KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 — 51200 MB/s per module, against 48000 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
ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB and KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 ships as 2 × 16GB — the same number of sticks either way, so both populate a board's slots identically.
Voltage
ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB is specified at 1.4 V and KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 at 1.35 V. That is the supply each kit's published profile asks the board for.
Lighting and timings
On the lighting question: ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB is published with RGB lighting, and KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 does not have RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple, the numbers that follow CAS: ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB runs 32-39-39, and KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 runs 28-36-36-76.
Which to buy
The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so no buying answer follows: which is worth more turns on what each costs, and that figure is the one missing. On the specifications alone, KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 is the quicker at 9.33 ns of true latency.
Common questions about this pair
- Is ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB faster than KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28?
- KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 is, on true latency: 9.33 ns against 10.00 ns. ADATA XPG Lancer Blade RGB DDR5-6400 2x16GB runs 6400 MT/s at CL32 and KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 runs 6000 MT/s at CL28; the CAS numbers alone do not settle it, because they count clock cycles rather than time.
- Which of these two should I buy?
- The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so no buying answer follows: which is worth more turns on what each costs, and that figure is the one missing. On the specifications alone, KLEVV FIT V DDR5-6000 2x16GB CL28 is the quicker at 9.33 ns of true latency.