G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB vs G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB
G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB and G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB arrive at the same true latency, 10.00 ns apiece. The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so what follows compares specifications alone.
| Specification | G.SkillRipjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB | G.SKILLTrident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB |
|---|---|---|
| Capacity (GB) | 32 | 32 |
| Speed (MT/s) | 6800better | 6000 |
| 34 | 30 | |
| True latency (ns) | 10.00 | 10.00 |
| Current best price | — | £619.00at Amazon.co.uk · captured 2026-09-13 |
| Price per GB | — | £19.34 |
No tracked price for G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB 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.
G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB vs G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB in detail
True latency
Both kits land on 10.00 ns. G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB gets there at 6800 MT/s at CL34, G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB at 6000 MT/s at CL30. CAS latency counts clock cycles rather than time, so a higher clock paired with a looser CAS number arrives at the same place — which is why these two spec sheets look different and the memory does not.
Transfer rate
G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB carries the higher rating, 6800 MT/s to 6000 MT/s for G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB — 54400 MB/s per module against 48000 MB/s. That is peak transfer rate, not access time: a higher clock is reached by counting more cycles for each access, which is why the CAS numbers differ too and why the true latency above is the directly comparable figure.
Kit layout
G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB and G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB ships as 2 × 16GB — the same number of sticks on both sides, so they populate a board's slots the same way.
Lighting, timings and ECC
On lighting: G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB is published with no RGB lighting, and G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB has RGB lighting. On the full timing tuple — the numbers after CAS — G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB publishes none, and G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB is 30-38-38-96. On error correction: the catalog does not state whether G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB has it, and G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB is published without ECC. ECC is a board and CPU feature as much as a module one, so it is worth having only where the platform can use it.
Which to buy
The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so there is no buying answer here; the specifications do not settle it either, since both reconcile to 10.00 ns of true latency. The sections above are what is left to choose on.
Common questions about this pair
- Is G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB faster than G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB?
- Neither is. Both work out at 10.00 ns of true latency — G.Skill Ripjaws S5 DDR5-6800 2x16GB runs 6800 MT/s at CL34, G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo RGB DDR5-6000 2x16GB runs 6000 MT/s at CL30, and those two land in the same place.
- Which of these two should I buy?
- The site holds no current price for at least one of these, so there is no buying answer here; the specifications do not settle it either, since both reconcile to 10.00 ns of true latency. The sections above are what is left to choose on.