Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB vs Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB

CrucialDDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB32 GB · 3200 MT/s · 22 CL · 13.75 ns
NetacShadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB32 GB · 3200 MT/s · 16 CL · 10.00 nsLeads on True latency
In short

10.00 ns of true latency for Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB against 13.75 ns for Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB, so the first of those is the quicker to respond. On top of the latency, Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB carries the lower tracked price, so both measured axes point the same way.

SpecificationCrucialDDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GBNetacShadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB
Capacity (GB)3232
Speed (MT/s)32003200
2216
True latency (ns)13.7510.00better
Current best price244,99 €at Amazon.de · captured 2026-09-13189,99 €betterat Amazon.de · captured 2026-09-13
Price per GB7,66 €5,94 €better

Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB vs Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB in detail

True latency

Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB is the lower-latency kit at 10.00 ns, against 13.75 ns for Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB — a difference of 3.75 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. Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB runs 3200 MT/s at CL22; Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB runs 3200 MT/s at CL16.

Transfer rate

Both kits are rated 3200 MT/s, which is 25600 MB/s per module. Their spec sheets part company on CAS latency rather than on clock, so the true-latency figures above are what separates them.

Price and tracked history

Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB is tracked at 244,99 € — 7,66 € per gigabyte — and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB at 189,99 €, or 5,94 €. Both are 32GB kits, so the totals compare directly: Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB is 55,00 € less than Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB. At 244,99 €, Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB is running 11% below its own 90-day median. At 189,99 €, Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB is running 3% below its own 90-day median.

Kit layout

Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB — the same number of sticks either way, so both populate a board's slots identically.

Voltage

Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB is specified at 1.2 V and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB at 1.35 V. That is the supply each kit's published profile asks the board for.

Lighting, timings and ECC

On the lighting question: Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB does not have RGB lighting, and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB does not have RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple, the numbers that follow CAS: Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB does not publish one, and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB runs 16-20-20-40. On error correction: Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB is published with no ECC, and the catalog does not state whether Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB supports it. 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

Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB leads Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB on both of the axes this page measures: the lower true latency, 10.00 ns against 13.75 ns, and the lower price of the two at what this site has tracked.

Common questions about this pair

Is Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB faster than Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB?
Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB is, on true latency: 10.00 ns against 13.75 ns. Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB runs 3200 MT/s at CL22 and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB runs 3200 MT/s at CL16; the CAS numbers alone do not settle it, because they count clock cycles rather than time.
Which one costs less?
Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB, at 189,99 € against 244,99 € — 55,00 € apart at the same 32GB.
Which of these two should I buy?
Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x16GB leads Crucial DDR4-3200 Desktop Memory 2x16GB on both of the axes this page measures: the lower true latency, 10.00 ns against 13.75 ns, and the lower price of the two at what this site has tracked.
How we track prices

Related comparisons