AMD Ryzen 3 110 vs AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen 3 110 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174. Neither processor has any benchmark entries in the current dataset, and the win tally shows zero victories for each side. This means the comparative performance picture must be assembled from the architectural and specification data recorded for both parts, rather than from direct measured scores.

The absence of empirical results is itself informative. Both chips sit at the 50th percentile in the overall CPU distribution, which suggests they are positioned near the middle of the recorded performance spectrum, but the percentile field does not carry a numeric score to anchor that placement. Without an average benchmark score for either unit, the database cannot yet confirm how the two parts stack up in real workloads.

What the recorded data does provide is a clear structural gap on paper. The Ryzen 3 110 offers 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Ryzen AI Embedded P174 doubles the core count to 10 and offers 20 threads. Multi-threaded workloads should theoretically favor the P174 by a wide margin, but the absence of measured scores means this remains a projection based on configuration, not a verified result.

Clock speeds tell a similar story with a twist. The Ryzen 3 110 starts at a higher base clock of 3.00 GHz, but the P174 has the higher boost ceiling at 5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz. Single-thread performance could favor the P174 when boost clocks are sustained, but the Ryzen 3 110 may hold an advantage in lighter loads where its higher base frequency keeps things responsive without needing to ramp.

The cache hierarchy also diverges sharply. The Ryzen 3 110 carries 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The P174 counters with 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 16 MB of L3. That doubling of L3 capacity and the larger per-core L2 allocation could reduce memory stalls in cache-sensitive workloads, though again, no benchmark confirms the real-world impact.

The process node differs as well: the Ryzen 3 110 is built on TSMC's 6 nm process, while the P174 uses a 4 nm process. The smaller node typically allows higher transistor density and better power efficiency, but the recorded data does not include transistor counts for either chip, so that advantage cannot be quantified here.

With no direct measurements, the head-to-head section must conclude with a structural comparison only. The P174 appears designed for heavier parallel workloads, while the Ryzen 3 110 targets a leaner, more modest footprint. The database will need benchmark entries to say anything more definitive.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded specifications, the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 wins in scenarios that benefit from parallel execution. Its 10 cores and 20 threads give it a 2.5x core advantage and a 2.5x thread advantage over the Ryzen 3 110's 4 cores and 8 threads. Compilation tasks, rendering jobs, scientific computing, and any workload that scales with thread count should theoretically favor the P174. The larger L3 cache at 16 MB versus 8 MB also suggests an edge in datasets that outgrow the smaller cache footprint.

The P174 additionally holds the higher memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s against 76.8 GB/s for the Ryzen 3 110, which could help in memory-intensive operations. Its integrated Radeon 880M graphics part is a different, higher-end SKU than the Radeon 660M in the Ryzen 3 110, though the database does not include graphics benchmark scores to verify which iGPU delivers better frame rates or compute results.

The AMD Ryzen 3 110 wins in scenarios where base clock matters. Its 3.00 GHz base frequency versus the P174's 2.00 GHz means the Ryzen 3 110 should feel more responsive in idle-to-light workloads, short bursts, and tasks that do not ramp to boost. It also uses a smaller die at 210 mm² against 233 mm², which could imply lower manufacturing cost per wafer, though pricing data is not recorded.

The Ryzen 3 110 also offers more PCIe lanes: 20 lanes against 16 lanes for the P174, both on Gen 4. Systems that need additional NVMe drives or expansion cards would have more headroom with the Ryzen 3 110. The socket difference, FP7 versus FP8, means the two chips are not interchangeable in the same motherboard, so platform-level wins depend on which socket a system already uses.

Neither chip shows a clear win in power consumption since both are rated at 28 W TDP. The parity in thermal design power means cooling requirements are similar, though the P174's 4 nm process may deliver better performance per watt in sustained loads, a claim the database cannot yet confirm without efficiency benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 uses Zen 3+ architecture under the codename Rembrandt-R, while the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 uses a hybrid configuration of Zen 5 and Zen 5c under the codename Gorgon Point. This is not a minor revision gap; Zen 3+ and Zen 5 represent multiple generations of microarchitectural development, with the newer Zen 5 design typically bringing higher instructions-per-clock and better branch prediction.

The process node separates them by two generations of lithography as well: 6 nm for the Ryzen 3 110 versus 4 nm for the P174, both from TSMC. The die size tells an interesting story: the P174 is only slightly larger at 233 mm² despite having 2.5x the cores, which aligns with the denser 4 nm process. The Ryzen 3 110 packs its 4 cores into 210 mm², which appears relatively spacious per core on the older node.

Cache architecture differs in both size and organization. The Ryzen 3 110 allocates 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, while the P174 provides 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache jumps from 8 MB shared on the Ryzen 3 110 to 16 MB on the P174. This hierarchy suggests the P174 is designed to feed its larger core count with more local storage, reducing reliance on system memory.

Memory support diverges: the Ryzen 3 110 supports DDR5 only, while the P174 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The dual-channel memory bus is present on both, but the P174's higher bandwidth rating of 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s reflects either faster memory speeds or the LPDDR5X option. Both processors support ECC memory, which is notable for embedded and workstation use cases.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Ryzen 3 110 provides 20 lanes of Gen 4, while the P174 provides 16 lanes of Gen 4. The lane count favors the Ryzen 3 110 for expansion, but the P174's smaller allocation may reflect a design optimized for more integrated, lower-footprint embedded systems.

The integrated graphics differ by SKU: Radeon 660M on the Ryzen 3 110 versus Radeon 880M on the P174. The database does not record shader counts, clock speeds, or compute units, so the performance delta between these iGPUs cannot be stated. The release dates also differ, with the Ryzen 3 110 appearing in late September 2025 and the P174 arriving in late February 2026, making the P174 the newer product by several months.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to two distinct design philosophies. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 is a compact 4-core, 8-thread part with a high base clock of 3.00 GHz, a boost of 4.30 GHz, and a modest 8 MB of L3. It suits workloads that prioritize quick single-thread response, light multitasking, and systems where the 20 PCIe lanes provide useful expansion flexibility. Its 6 nm process and smaller die at 210 mm² suggest a more conservative, cost-conscious design, though no pricing data is recorded.

The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 is the heavier lift. Its 10 cores, 20 threads, 5.00 GHz boost, and 16 MB of L3 position it for parallel and sustained workloads. The 4 nm process, larger 233 mm² die, and support for both DDR5 and LPDDR5X indicate a more modern platform aimed at embedded AI and compute-heavy tasks. The higher memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s and the Radeon 880M iGPU reinforce that positioning.

Which chip should be selected depends entirely on the workload profile. For a system that runs mostly single-threaded applications, responds to user input, and needs more PCIe expansion, the Ryzen 3 110 has the higher base clock and lane count. For any workload that scales across cores, the P174's 2.5x core advantage and larger cache make it the logical choice, assuming the platform supports its FP8 socket.

The 28 W TDP parity means neither chip has a power-consumption advantage in the recorded data. The P174's newer process may yield better energy efficiency per operation, but the database does not contain the measurements to confirm that. Both parts sit at the 50th percentile overall, indicating middle-of-the-road positioning in the broader CPU landscape, but the absence of benchmark scores prevents a definitive performance ranking.

The verdict from the data: the Ryzen 3 110 serves lighter, latency-sensitive roles, while the P174 targets throughput-oriented embedded workloads. Without benchmark entries, the database cannot certify the magnitude of the P174's multi-thread lead or the Ryzen 3 110's single-thread edge, but the specification differences are substantial enough to guide platform decisions.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 110 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 10 cores and 20 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 3 110 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz.

Q: What is the L3 cache capacity for each chip?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 110 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 has 16 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 3 110 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor supports LPDDR5X memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 supports DDR5 only.

Q: What is the TDP for each processor?

A: Both the AMD Ryzen 3 110 and the AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 have a TDP of 28 W.

Specification Differences

| Field | AMD Ryzen 3 110 | AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P174 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 10 |

| Threads | 8 | 20 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | AMD Socket FP8 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Not recorded (Zen 5 / Zen 5c generation) |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Gorgon Point |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 233 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 16 MB |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Radeon 880M |

| Release Date | 2025-09-30 | 2026-02-28 |

| Part Number | 100-000000549 (FP7r2) | Unknown |

The two chips share several traits: both are made by AMD, both are rated at 28 W TDP, both use dual-channel memory buses, both support ECC, both use Gen 4 PCIe, both are unlocked-multiplier parts, and both are classified as mobile market segment with active production status. The recorded differences above capture the full set of distinguishing fields in the database.