AMD Ryzen 3 110 vs AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 3 110 and the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485. Neither processor has any submitted benchmark results, average scores, or percentile rankings beyond the baseline 50th percentile assigned to all CPUs with no recorded data. Both parts show zero wins in the head-to-head comparison table, and the wins counter is tied at zero for each side.

Because the benchmark fields are empty, the analysis must rely entirely on the architectural specifications and memory subsystem data recorded in the database. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 doubles the core count (8 cores versus 4), doubles the thread count (16 threads versus 8), and carries a higher base clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.00 GHz) alongside a higher boost clock (5.00 GHz versus 4.30 GHz). These figures indicate that in any multi-threaded workload, the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 should deliver roughly twice the parallel throughput of the Ryzen 3 110, assuming similar instructions-per-clock efficiency. The single-thread advantage is smaller but still present: the boost clock difference of 0.70 GHz represents a 16.3% higher peak frequency for the larger part.

The memory subsystem gap is even more pronounced. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses quad-channel LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s, while the Ryzen 3 110 uses dual-channel DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s. That is a 3.6x difference in theoretical memory bandwidth. For memory-bound applications such as integrated graphics rendering, large dataset processing, or virtualized workloads, this bandwidth differential will dominate over the core count advantage. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 also carries a larger L3 cache (32 MB shared versus 8 MB shared), which reduces the frequency of main-memory accesses in cache-resident workloads.

The Ryzen 3 110 does hold advantages in power efficiency and physical footprint. Its TDP is recorded at 28 watts versus 55 watts for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485, meaning the smaller chip consumes less than half the thermal budget. The die size also differs substantially: 210 mm² for the Ryzen 3 110 versus 70.6 mm² for the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485. While the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses a smaller manufacturing process (4 nm versus 6 nm), its die is significantly smaller, suggesting the Zen 5 architecture packs more functionality into less silicon area.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Ryzen 3 110 uses Zen 3+ under the Rembrandt-R codename, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses Zen 5 under the Gorgon Halo codename. Both are manufactured by TSMC, but on different nodes: the Ryzen 3 110 uses 6 nm, and the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses 4 nm. The process node shrink combined with the newer Zen 5 microarchitecture indicates the larger part should deliver higher instructions per clock, though the database does not provide direct IPC measurements.

Cache organization differs substantially. The Ryzen 3 110 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 32 MB of shared L3. Per-core L2 capacity is doubled, and total L3 capacity is quadrupled. For workloads with moderate working sets that fit within 32 MB but not 8 MB, the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 will avoid many costly DRAM accesses.

Memory support diverges on multiple axes. The Ryzen 3 110 supports DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 supports LPDDR5X in a quad-channel configuration. Both support ECC memory, which is unusual for mobile parts and suggests both are positioned for reliability-sensitive workloads. The PCIe implementation also differs: the Ryzen 3 110 exposes Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only), while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 exposes Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Ryzen 3 110 actually offers more CPU-attached PCIe lanes, which could matter for storage or external device connectivity.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen 3 110 pairs with a Radeon 660M, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 pairs with a Radeon 8050S. The database does not record shader counts, clock speeds, or compute units for either iGPU, but the Radeon 8050S benefits from the quad-channel LPDDR5X memory path, which provides 273.1 GB/s of bandwidth versus 76.8 GB/s for the Radeon 660M. In graphics workloads, memory bandwidth is often the limiting factor for integrated solutions, so the larger part should deliver markedly higher frame rates and rendering throughput.

The socket and platform differ: the Ryzen 3 110 uses AMD Socket FP7, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses AMD Socket FP11. These are not interchangeable. The Ryzen 3 110's part number includes the FP7r2 revision identifier, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses part number 100-000002144. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, meaning overclocking via multiplier adjustment is not supported on either part.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 is the dominant processor in raw computational capability. It has twice the cores, twice the threads, higher base and boost clocks, four times the L3 cache, and more than three times the memory bandwidth. Any workload that scales with core count, memory bandwidth, or cache capacity will favor the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 by a substantial margin. The 5.00 GHz boost clock versus 4.30 GHz also gives it the edge in lightly threaded tasks.

The Ryzen 3 110 is the appropriate choice when power consumption is the primary constraint. Its 28-watt TDP versus 55 watts represents a 48% reduction in thermal design power. For fanless or low-power mobile designs, or for systems where sustained all-core load must fit within a tight thermal envelope, the Ryzen 3 110 is the more suitable part. It also offers more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16), which may be relevant for configurations with multiple NVMe drives or other high-bandwidth peripherals.

Neither processor has recorded benchmark scores, so the verdict rests on specification analysis. The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 is the clear performance leader on every computational metric in the database. The Ryzen 3 110 wins only on power efficiency and PCIe lane count. For any user prioritizing speed, the choice is unambiguous. For users prioritizing battery life or thermal headroom, the Ryzen 3 110 is the sensible selection.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has 8 cores and 16 threads. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 273.1 GB/s using quad-channel LPDDR5X. The Ryzen 3 110 has 76.8 GB/s using dual-channel DDR5. The larger part offers approximately 3.6 times the bandwidth.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 3 110 and the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 have ECC memory support enabled in the database.

Q: How do the boost clocks compare?

A: The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 boosts to 5.00 GHz, while the Ryzen 3 110 boosts to 4.30 GHz. The difference is 0.70 GHz in favor of the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 uses a 4 nm process, while the Ryzen 3 110 uses a 6 nm process. Both are fabricated by TSMC.

Q: What are the integrated graphics in each processor?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 includes a Radeon 660M, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 includes a Radeon 8050S. The Radeon 8050S has access to the much higher memory bandwidth of the larger part.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 wins decisively in multi-core throughput. With 8 cores versus 4, 16 threads versus 8, and a 2.00 GHz higher base clock (3.60 GHz versus 3.00 GHz), any parallel workload that scales across cores will complete substantially faster on the larger chip. The 32 MB shared L3 cache versus 8 MB also means larger working sets stay on-chip, reducing memory stalls. The quad-channel LPDDR5X memory path with 273.1 GB/s bandwidth versus 76.8 GB/s gives it a commanding lead in memory-intensive tasks such as large database queries, compilation of huge codebases, video encoding, and integrated graphics rendering.

The Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 also wins single-thread performance based on clock speed. The 5.00 GHz boost versus 4.30 GHz provides a 16.3% higher peak frequency, so even lightly threaded applications will feel snappier on the larger part. The newer Zen 5 architecture over Zen 3+ likely adds further instructions-per-clock improvements, though the database does not quantify this.

The Ryzen 3 110 wins in power efficiency. Its 28-watt TDP versus 55 watts means it draws less than half the thermal budget, making it suitable for passively cooled designs, ultraportable laptops, or systems where battery life is paramount. It also wins on PCIe lane count for the CPU: 20 lanes versus 16, which could be advantageous in systems needing more directly attached storage or expansion devices.

The die size comparison is interesting: the Ryzen 3 110 has a 210 mm² die, while the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 has a 70.6 mm² die. The larger part uses far less silicon area despite having more cores and a bigger cache, reflecting the efficiency of the 4 nm node and Zen 5 design. This does not translate to a user-facing advantage directly, but it indicates the Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 is a more dense and modern design.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 110 | AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 485 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 55 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | AMD Socket FP11 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Gorgon Halo |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 70.6 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) | 32 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Quad-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 273.1 GB/s |

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

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Radeon 8050S |

| Release Date | 2025-09-30 | 2026-05-19 |

| Part Number | 100-000000549 (FP7r2) | 100-000002144 |

Both processors come from AMD, target the mobile segment, are marked as Active in production, have ECC memory support, and have locked multipliers. Both are manufactured by TSMC, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP in the database. The release dates differ by roughly eight months, with the Ryzen 3 110 appearing first.