Consumercarts

Consumercarts is reader-supported. Learn more

ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ vs ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB: Comparison

ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ and ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB separate most on peak bandwidth: ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ at 25.6 GB/s, ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB at 96.0 GB/s, 73% in favor of ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB. Capacity Per Module splits them by another 50%, again favoring ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB.

Pick the ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB if that matters to you: 28% lower true latency (10.0 ns vs 13.8 ns), so it responds faster, which shows up in games on Ryzen. These kits use different memory generations and do not fit the same motherboard.

Which is better, ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ or ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB?

On paper, ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB has the edge on peak bandwidth, at 96.0 GB/s vs ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ at 25.6 GB/s.

What is the main difference between ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ and ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB?

The ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB is the stronger choice on paper: it has 28% lower true latency (10.0 ns vs 13.8 ns), so it responds faster, which shows up in games on Ryzen. It also has 2x the capacity per module (32 GB vs 16 GB), which is what keeps browser tabs, games and editing apps from spilling to the SSD.

ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ (16GB DDR4-3200 ECC UDIMM/2Rx8/1.2V/288-Pin/Industrial-Grade)
ADATAADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB (2x32GB) DDR5-6000
ADATAADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB

Specs and benchmarks

  • Speed Score

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    –
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    8.3/10

    DDR4 and DDR5 kits are scored on separate scales, so these two scores can't be compared directly. Your motherboard supports only one of the two.

  • DDR Generation

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    DDR4
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    DDR5

  • Brand

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    ADATA
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    ADATA

  • Part Number

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH

  • Series

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    ADATA Industrial
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    Lancer Blade

  • CAS Latency

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    22Best
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    30-36%

  • RAM Segment

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    Industrial/Embedded
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    Desktop DDR5

  • Module Count

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    1
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    2

  • Form Factor

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    DIMM
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    Desktop DIMM

  • Capacity Per Module

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    16 GB-50%
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    32 GBBest

  • True Latency

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    13.8 ns-38%
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    10.0 nsBest

  • Peak Bandwidth

    ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ
    25.6 GB/s-73%
    ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB
    96.0 GB/sBest

    Which one should you pick?

    Choose ADATA Industrial AD4U3200716G22-BADZ if you want the lower CAS latency (22 vs 30).

    Choose ADATA XPG Lancer Blade AX5U6000C3032G-DTLABWH 64GB if you want the higher capacity per module (32 GB vs 16 GB), the lower true latency (10.0 ns vs 13.8 ns) and the higher peak bandwidth (96.0 GB/s vs 25.6 GB/s).

    More comparisons in RAM