Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 vs G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB
On true latency Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 comes out ahead: 8.64 ns, where G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB takes 8.89 ns. The lower tracked price belongs to G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB, which leaves each kit ahead on one axis and neither ahead on both.
| Specification | CrucialBallistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 | G.SKILLRipjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 32 | 32 |
| Speed (MT/s) | 4400better | 3600 |
| 19 | 16 | |
| True latency (ns) | 8.64better | 8.89 |
| Current best price | £350.00at Amazon.co.uk · captured 2026-09-13 | £259.26betterat Amazon.co.uk · captured 2026-09-13 |
| Price per GB | £10.94 | £8.10better |
Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 vs G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB in detail
True latency
Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 is the lower-latency kit at 8.64 ns, against 8.89 ns for G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB — a difference of 0.25 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 Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 runs 4400 MT/s at CL19; G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB runs 3600 MT/s at CL16.
Transfer rate
Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 is rated 4400 MT/s against 3600 MT/s for G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB — 35200 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.
Price and tracked history
Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 is tracked at £350.00 — £10.94 per gigabyte — and G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB at £259.26, or £8.10. Both are 32GB kits, so the totals compare directly: G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB is £90.74 less than Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19. At £259.26, G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB is running 8% below its own 90-day median.
Kit layout
Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 ships as 2 × 16GB and G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB — the same number of sticks either way, so both populate a board's slots identically.
Lighting and timings
On the lighting question: Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 is published with RGB lighting, and G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB does not have RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple, the numbers that follow CAS: Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 does not publish one, and G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB runs 16-19-19-39.
Which to buy
The two split the axes this page measures, so no one kit is the answer. The lower tracked price belongs to G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB; the lower true latency to Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19, 8.64 ns against 8.89 ns. Weighing money against latency is a decision about the machine, and it stays with the reader.
Common questions about this pair
- Is Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 faster than G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB?
- Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 is, on true latency: 8.64 ns against 8.89 ns. Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19 runs 4400 MT/s at CL19 and G.Skill Ripjaws V 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 one costs less?
- G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB, at £259.26 against £350.00 — £90.74 apart at the same 32GB.
- Which of these two should I buy?
- The two split the axes this page measures, so no one kit is the answer. The lower tracked price belongs to G.Skill Ripjaws V DDR4-3600 2x16GB; the lower true latency to Crucial Ballistix DDR4-3200 2x16GB 4400 CL19, 8.64 ns against 8.89 ns. Weighing money against latency is a decision about the machine, and it stays with the reader.