KLEVV DDR5-6400 CL32 2×32 GB vs Samsung DDR4-2667 2×16 GB SO-DIMM (OEM)
Short answer: which is best?
KLEVV DDR5-6400 CL32 2×32 GB is 84.6 % stronger than Samsung DDR4-2667 2×16 GB SO-DIMM (OEM). KLEVV DDR5-6400 CL32 2×32 GB ranks #5 of 120 measured memory kits at WhatFPS (12,661 RAM score in its best run — 1 rig, 2 verified runs). Samsung DDR4-2667 2×16 GB SO-DIMM (OEM) ranks #88 of 120 measured memory kits at WhatFPS (6,860 RAM score in its best run — 1 rig, 4 verified runs). Each part is shown at its best run, picked from 6 verified WhatFPS runs — measured, not estimated, not self-reported.
Measured comparison
| Metric | KLEVV DDR5-6400 CL32 2×32 GB | Samsung DDR4-2667 2×16 GB SO-DIMM (OEM) |
|---|---|---|
| RAM score, best run (the kit's own performance: bandwidth + latency) | 12,661 | 6,860 |
| Best rig (GAMING — whole PC) | 15,624 | 6,106 |
| Bandwidth, one thread | 48,078 MB/s | 18,173 MB/s |
| RAM latency (lower is better) | 79.8 ns | 102.7 ns |
| Rated speed | 6,400 MT/s | 2,667 MT/s |
| Runs at (best run) | 6,400 MT/s | 2,667 MT/s |
| Capacity | 64 GB | 32 GB |
What the numbers mean
The headline score is the part's best measured run, and the measurements under it come from that same run. It shows what the part has been proven to do — not what an average rig gets out of it. The RAM score is the kit's measured performance in the rigs it sat in — single-thread bandwidth and latency beyond L3. Platform, BIOS settings and whether XMP/EXPO was on all affect it. GAMING is the whole rig's score. We show both and never mix them.
All numbers come from our benchmark suite, the same test on every PC, written in Rust with no middleware. The methodology is open at https://whatfps.com/metodik
All measurements for KLEVV DDR5-6400 CL32 2×32 GB · All measurements for Samsung DDR4-2667 2×16 GB SO-DIMM (OEM)