G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB vs Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB
On true latency G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB comes out ahead: 8.89 ns, where Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB takes 10.00 ns. G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is also the cheaper of the two at the prices tracked here, so it leads on both of the axes this page measures.
| Specification | G.SKILLRipjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB | NetacShadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 16 | 16 |
| Speed (MT/s) | 3600better | 3200 |
| 16 | 16 | |
| True latency (ns) | 8.89better | 10.00 |
| Current best price | 161,05 €betterat Amazon.es · captured 2026-09-13 | 173,78 €at Amazon.es · captured 2026-09-13 |
| Price per GB | 10,07 €better | 10,86 € |
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB vs Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB in detail
True latency
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is the lower-latency kit at 8.89 ns, against 10.00 ns for Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB — a difference of 1.11 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 Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB runs 3600 MT/s at CL16; Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB runs 3200 MT/s at CL16.
Transfer rate
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is rated 3600 MT/s against 3200 MT/s for Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB — 28800 MB/s per module, against 25600 MB/s. That is peak transfer rate, not access time. Both kits are published at CL16, so the same count of cycles takes less time at the higher clock, and the true latency above is the directly comparable figure.
Price and tracked history
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is tracked at 161,05 € — 10,07 € per gigabyte — and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB at 173,78 €, or 10,86 €. Both are 16GB kits, so the totals compare directly: G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is 12,73 € less than Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB. At 161,05 €, G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is running 6% below its own 90-day median. 173,78 € is the lowest price this site has recorded for Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB.
Kit layout
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB ships as 2 × 8GB and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB ships as 2 × 8GB — the same number of sticks either way, so both populate a board's slots identically.
Lighting and timings
On the lighting question: G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB does not have RGB lighting, and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB does not have RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple, the numbers that follow CAS: G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB runs 16-19-19-39, and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB runs 16-20-20-40.
Which to buy
G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB leads Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB on both of the axes this page measures: the lower true latency, 8.89 ns against 10.00 ns, and the lower price of the two at what this site has tracked.
Common questions about this pair
- Is G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB faster than Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB?
- G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB is, on true latency: 8.89 ns against 10.00 ns. G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB runs 3600 MT/s at CL16 and Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB 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?
- G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB, at 161,05 € against 173,78 € — 12,73 € apart at the same 16GB.
- Which of these two should I buy?
- G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x8GB leads Netac Shadow II DDR4-3200 2x8GB on both of the axes this page measures: the lower true latency, 8.89 ns against 10.00 ns, and the lower price of the two at what this site has tracked.