AMD Ryzen 3 110 vs AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded benchmark scores for either the AMD Ryzen 3 110 or the AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and the average benchmark score for both processors is zero. Consequently, there are no win counts to assign: winsA is zero and winsB is zero. The percentile ranking for both CPUs against all other processors in the database is identical at 50, which reflects the absence of performance measurements rather than any parity in actual capability.

Without measured scores, the comparison must rely entirely on the architectural specifications recorded in the database. The Ryzen 3 110 is a 4-core, 8-thread mobile processor with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is a 12-core, 24-thread desktop-class processor with a base clock of 4.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The core count difference alone suggests a large divide in multi-threaded throughput, but no benchmark confirms this numerically.

The Ryzen 3 110 operates at a thermal design power of 28 watts, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is rated at 120 watts. That 92-watt gap indicates the embedded part is designed for sustained high-load operation with adequate cooling, whereas the mobile chip targets power-constrained environments. The boost clock advantage of 1.20 GHz for the 9900X3D points to higher single-thread performance potential, but again, the database lacks measured confirmation.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Ryzen 3 110 carries 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D provides 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 128 MB of L3. The L3 capacity difference is sixteenfold, which typically benefits workloads with large working sets that fit in cache, but the database records no benchmark to demonstrate this effect.

Memory bandwidth also separates the two parts. The Ryzen 3 110 supports DDR5 with a recorded bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D also supports DDR5 but with a higher recorded bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. That 12.8 GB/s difference could influence memory-intensive operations, though no test data quantifies the impact.

The PCIe interface differs: the Ryzen 3 110 provides Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D provides Gen 5 with 24 lanes. The generation and lane count advantages favor the embedded part for high-throughput peripherals such as GPUs and NVMe storage, but the database lacks expansion-card benchmarks.

The Verdict

The recorded data shows no measured performance for either CPU, so any verdict must be drawn strictly from specifications. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D holds a clear structural advantage in core count, thread count, clock speeds, cache size, memory bandwidth, and PCIe generation. The Ryzen 3 110 counters with a much lower thermal design power, which suits compact or battery-powered systems.

For workloads that scale with threads, the 9900X3D has 3 times the cores and 3 times the threads of the Ryzen 3 110. For workloads that depend on single-thread speed, the 9900X3D offers a 1.20 GHz higher boost clock. For workloads that benefit from large caches, the 9900X3D provides 128 MB of L3 versus 8 MB. Each of these differences favors the embedded processor, but none is validated by an actual benchmark score in the database.

The Ryzen 3 110 is the only option for systems constrained to a 28-watt thermal envelope. The 9900X3D requires 120 watts, which is over 4 times the power budget. In fanless or passively cooled designs, or in laptops where battery life matters, the lower TDP is a decisive factor. The database records no power-efficiency metric, however, so this remains a specification-based inference.

Neither processor has a launch MSRP recorded, so no cost comparison is possible. The verdict from the data is straightforward: the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D dominates on every raw performance-oriented specification, while the Ryzen 3 110 dominates on power consumption and mobility. No benchmark results exist to override these structural conclusions.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D wins in every category that can be assessed from the database's recorded specifications. It has more cores, more threads, higher base and boost clocks, more L1 and L2 per core, vastly more L3, higher memory bandwidth, more PCIe lanes, and a newer PCIe generation. It also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, whereas the Ryzen 3 110 has a locked multiplier. The 9900X3D is built on a 4 nm process from TSMC, while the Ryzen 3 110 uses a 6 nm process from the same foundry. The embedded part has a transistor count of 16,630 million spread across two 70.6 mm² dies, while the Ryzen 3 110 has a single 210 mm² die with no transistor count recorded.

The Ryzen 3 110 wins in power efficiency and physical integration. Its 28-watt TDP is less than a quarter of the 9900X3D's 120-watt rating. It uses the AMD Socket FP7, a mobile socket, while the 9900X3D uses the desktop AMD Socket AM5. The Ryzen 3 110 integrates a Radeon 660M graphics unit, whereas the 9900X3D integrates a generic Radeon Graphics unit; the database provides no performance comparison between these iGPUs. The Ryzen 3 110 is marketed as a Mobile segment part and uses the Zen 3+ architecture (Rembrandt-R), while the 9900X3D is a Desktop segment part using Zen 5 (Granite Ridge) from the Ryzen Embedded 9000 series.

The 9900X3D's 128 MB of L3 cache is the standout architectural feature. This is likely a 3D V-Cache configuration given the X3D designation, though the database does not explicitly list a vCache3d value. The Ryzen 3 110 has no such cache technology. Workloads that repeatedly access large datasets, such as certain simulations or database operations, would prefer the 9900X3D's cache capacity. The database records no benchmark to confirm this advantage.

The Ryzen 3 110's 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth is lower than the 9900X3D's 89.6 GB/s, but both use dual-channel DDR5. The Ryzen 3 110's lower bandwidth is consistent with its smaller core count and lower power budget. For memory-bound tasks that do not exceed 8 MB of working set, the Ryzen 3 110 might still perform adequately, but no measurement exists in the database.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 110 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference between the two?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 is rated at 28 watts TDP, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is rated at 120 watts TDP.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 128 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: Both support DDR5 memory with dual-channel memory bus, but the Ryzen 3 110 has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D has 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What PCIe versions and lane counts are recorded?

A: The Ryzen 3 110 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D uses PCIe Gen 5 with 24 lanes.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores available for either processor?

A: No, the database records zero benchmark scores for both the Ryzen 3 110 and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D, and both have a percentile rank of 50.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations. The Ryzen 3 110 uses Zen 3+ with the codename Rembrandt-R, while the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D uses Zen 5 with the codename Granite Ridge. The manufacturing process differs: the Ryzen 3 110 is built on a 6 nm node at TSMC, and the 9900X3D is built on a 4 nm node at the same foundry. The die configuration also differs, with the Ryzen 3 110 using a single 210 mm² die and the 9900X3D using two 70.6 mm² dies, totaling 16,630 million transistors.

The cache layout is per-core for L1 and L2 in both cases, but with different sizes. The Ryzen 3 110 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core. The 9900X3D has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache is the largest difference: 8 MB shared for the Ryzen 3 110 versus 128 MB for the 9900X3D. The 9900X3D's designation includes X3D, which in AMD's naming convention indicates 3D-stacked cache, though the database does not list a specific vCache3d value.

The sockets are incompatible. The Ryzen 3 110 uses AMD Socket FP7, a mobile platform socket, while the 9900X3D uses AMD Socket AM5, a desktop socket. The Ryzen 3 110 has a locked multiplier, whereas the 9900X3D has an unlocked multiplier, permitting frequency tuning. Both processors support ECC memory and integrate a Radeon graphics unit, but the Ryzen 3 110's iGPU is the Radeon 660M specifically, while the 9900X3D's is listed as generic Radeon Graphics.

The release dates differ by a week: the Ryzen 3 110 was released on 2025-09-30 and the Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D on 2025-10-06. The Ryzen Embedded 9900X3D is part of the 9000 series and belongs to the Ryzen Embedded generation, while the Ryzen 3 110 is part of the Ryzen 3 generation. The production status for both is Active, and neither has a recorded launch MSRP. The part numbers are 100-000000549 (FP7r2) for the Ryzen 3 110 and 100-000001368E for the 9900X3D. The market segments are Mobile for the Ryzen 3 110 and Desktop for the 9900X3D, which aligns with their respective sockets and power envelopes.