AMD Ryzen 3 110 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 3 110 against the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X. Neither processor has a measured average benchmark score, and the wins tally sits at zero for both sides. The absence of benchmark data means the comparison must rely entirely on architectural and specification differences rather than measured performance deltas.

The Ryzen 3 110 holds a percentile rank of 50 among all CPUs, as does the Ryzen Embedded 9900X. With identical percentiles and no average benchmark scores, the two parts cannot be separated by empirical testing results. The Ryzen 3 110 shows no recorded wins, and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X likewise shows none. Benchmark comparisons between these two parts remain undefined in the database.

What the data does reveal is a stark contrast in core and thread counts. The Ryzen 3 110 provides 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X provides 12 cores and 24 threads. That is a 3x difference in core count and a 3x difference in thread count. For multi-threaded workloads, the Embedded part has a structural advantage that does not depend on clock speed: it can process three times as many threads simultaneously.

Clock rates also favor the Embedded 9900X decisively. The Ryzen 3 110 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. In base clock terms, the Embedded part runs 1.40 GHz higher, which is a 46.7% higher base frequency. In boost clock terms, the Embedded part runs 1.30 GHz higher, which is a 30.2% higher boost frequency. Single-threaded performance, which scales directly with clock speed, should favor the Embedded 9900X substantially.

The Ryzen 3 110 does hold one advantage: thermal design power. Its TDP is 28 watts, compared to 120 watts for the Ryzen Embedded 9900X. That is a 92-watt difference, meaning the Ryzen 3 110 draws 76.7% less power under its rated thermal envelope. For compact or thermally constrained systems, the Ryzen 3 110 is the only viable option among the two.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from entirely different architectural generations. The Ryzen 3 110 uses the Zen 3+ architecture, codenamed Rembrandt-R, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Granite Ridge. The manufacturing process differs as well: the Ryzen 3 110 is built on a 6 nm process at TSMC, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X is built on a 4 nm process at the same foundry. The smaller process node for the Embedded part allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency per transistor.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a transistor count of 16,630 million, while the Ryzen 3 110 has no recorded transistor count in the database. Die size also differs: the Ryzen 3 110 has a die size of 210 mm², while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses a dual-chiplet design with two dies of 70.6 mm² each, for a combined die area of 141.2 mm². The Ryzen 3 110 uses a monolithic die, whereas the Embedded 9900X uses a chiplet-based design.

Cache hierarchies are markedly different. The Ryzen 3 110 has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1 MB of L2 cache per core, and 64 MB of L3 cache. In total L3 capacity, the Embedded part has 8x the L3 cache of the Ryzen 3 110. Per-core L2 cache is doubled in the Embedded part: 1 MB versus 512 KB.

Memory support is identical in type: both use DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus. However, memory bandwidth differs. The Ryzen 3 110 has a rated memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a rated memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. That is a 12.8 GB/s difference, or 16.7% higher bandwidth for the Embedded part. Both support ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs significantly. The Ryzen 3 110 provides PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Ryzen Embedded 9900X provides PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes (CPU only). The Embedded part has both a newer PCIe generation and four additional lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on both but with different branding. The Ryzen 3 110 uses Radeon 660M graphics, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses unspecified Radeon Graphics. The database does not record clock speeds, execution units, or performance levels for either integrated GPU.

Socket and platform differ entirely. The Ryzen 3 110 uses AMD Socket FP7, a mobile socket, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket. This makes the two parts physically incompatible: they cannot be installed in the same motherboard.

The Ryzen 3 110 is not multiplier-unlocked, meaning its clock multiplier cannot be adjusted for overclocking. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X is multiplier-unlocked, allowing user-controlled overclocking within the platform's limits.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors built for entirely different purposes. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 is a mobile processor on Socket FP7 with a 28-watt TDP, 4 cores, and 8 threads. The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X is a desktop-class embedded processor on Socket AM5 with a 120-watt TDP, 12 cores, and 24 threads.

For systems where power consumption is the primary constraint, the Ryzen 3 110 is the clear choice. Its 28-watt TDP allows for passive or low-airflow cooling solutions, and its mobile socket fits compact motherboards. The 4-core, 8-thread configuration is sufficient for light multitasking and single-threaded applications.

For compute-heavy workloads that can use many threads, the Ryzen Embedded 9900X dominates. Its 12 cores and 24 threads, combined with a 4.40 GHz base clock and 5.60 GHz boost clock, provide a 3x thread advantage and substantially higher clock speeds. The 64 MB of L3 cache and PCIe Gen 5 connectivity further support high-throughput applications.

The Ryzen 3 110 has no benchmark scores in the database, so its real-world performance cannot be quantified. The same applies to the Ryzen Embedded 9900X. The verdict must rest on architectural differences alone.

Users needing a low-power, mobile-oriented processor should select the Ryzen 3 110. Users needing maximum multi-threaded throughput and high clock speeds on a desktop platform should select the Ryzen Embedded 9900X. The two parts do not compete in the same market segment: one is mobile, the other is desktop embedded.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 110 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 boosts to 4.30 GHz, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X boosts to 5.60 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X supports PCIe Gen 5, with 24 lanes. The Ryzen 3 110 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Ryzen 3 110 and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 has a TDP of 28 watts, and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X has a TDP of 120 watts.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Ryzen Embedded 9900X has 64 MB of L3 cache, which is 8x the 8 MB of L3 cache in the Ryzen 3 110.

Q: Are the sockets interchangeable?

A: No, the Ryzen 3 110 uses AMD Socket FP7, and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X uses AMD Socket AM5. They are not compatible.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 3 110 wins in power efficiency. Its 28-watt TDP is 92 watts lower than the Embedded 9900X's 120-watt TDP. For battery-powered devices, fanless designs, or systems with minimal cooling, the Ryzen 3 110 is the only sensible option. The mobile Socket FP7 platform further reinforces its suitability for laptops and compact embedded systems.

The Ryzen 3 110 also wins in die area efficiency for a monolithic design. Its 210 mm² die is larger than the combined 141.2 mm² of the Embedded 9900X's two chiplets, but the Ryzen 3 110 achieves a full processor on a single die, which simplifies interconnects and reduces latency for its core count.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins decisively in raw compute capacity. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide triple the thread count of the Ryzen 3 110. For rendering, compilation, virtualization, or any parallel workload, the Embedded part processes far more work per clock cycle.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins in clock speed. Its base clock of 4.40 GHz exceeds the Ryzen 3 110's boost clock of 4.30 GHz. Even without boost, the Embedded part runs faster than the Ryzen 3 110 at its maximum. Single-threaded performance will strongly favor the Embedded 9900X.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins in cache capacity. Its 64 MB L3 cache versus 8 MB is an 8x advantage. Its 1 MB per-core L2 cache versus 512 KB per-core doubles the per-core L2. Larger caches reduce memory latency and improve performance on data-heavy workloads.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins in memory bandwidth. Its 89.6 GB/s rating is 16.7% higher than the Ryzen 3 110's 76.8 GB/s. Combined with PCIe Gen 5 and 24 lanes, the Embedded part moves more data into and out of the processor.

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X wins in overclocking capability. It is multiplier-unlocked, while the Ryzen 3 110 is locked. Users can adjust the Embedded part's clock multiplier to extract additional performance, subject to cooling and power delivery.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 110 | AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X |

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

| Cores | 4 | 12 |

| Threads | 8 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.30 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 28 W | 120 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP7 | AMD Socket AM5 |

| Architecture | Zen 3+ | Zen 5 |

| Codename | Rembrandt-R | Granite Ridge |

| Process Node | 6 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | TSMC |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | 2x 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) | 64 MB |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 16,630 million |

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

| PCIe | Gen 4, 20 Lanes | Gen 5, 24 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 660M | Radeon Graphics |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release Date | 2025-09-30 | 2025-10-06 |

The two processors differ in every major specification except DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, manufacturer, and production status. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X is newer by six days in release date. The Ryzen 3 110 is a mobile part with a 28-watt TDP and locked multiplier. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X is a desktop embedded part with a 120-watt TDP, unlocked multiplier, and more than double the physical resources in cores, cache, and PCIe lanes. The process node difference (6 nm versus 4 nm) and architecture generation gap (Zen 3+ versus Zen 5) indicate a significant performance-per-clock improvement for the Embedded part, although no benchmark scores are recorded to quantify the actual gain.