AMD Ryzen 3 110 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

AMD Ryzen 3 110 and Intel Core Ultra 5 225T occupy different corners of the processor market, one as a low-power mobile chip and the other as a desktop part with a larger core count. The recorded data shows the Intel part holds a decisive lead in every benchmark category where scores exist, but the AMD chip’s specifications still define its role for specific workloads. This analysis compares the two directly using only the measured scores and listed specifications.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has benchmark scores across Cinebench and Passmark suites, while the AMD Ryzen 3 110 has no recorded benchmark results in the database. That absence is itself the defining comparison: every measurable performance figure belongs to the Intel part. The Intel chip’s Cinebench R15 multicore score is 2214, and its single-core score is 312. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore result climbs to 9227 with a single-core score of 1302. In Cinebench R23, the Intel part reaches 21971 multicore and 3101 single-core. These numbers illustrate a clear scaling pattern: as the workload becomes more demanding, the multicore scores increase substantially, while single-core performance remains strong but grows at a slower relative rate.

Passmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T show a similar dominance. The multithread score is 25358, and the single-thread score is 4348, with the same value recorded under the alternative singlethread label. Integer math scores 59543, floating point math scores 82751, and extended instructions scores 20083. Data compression hits 233998, while data encryption scores 18289. Prime number finding is notably lower at 284, which reflects the nature of that test rather than a weakness in the chip. Random string sorting scores 28774, and physics scores 2053. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 30468, with a percentile rank of 82 across all CPUs.

The nearest rivals for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T provide context for these numbers. The Intel Core i9-11980HK has an average score of 30422, which is 0.2% behind the Ultra 5 225T. The AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS scores 30390, also 0.3% behind. The Intel Core i5-13600H scores 30548, which is 0.3% ahead of the Ultra 5 225T. The AMD Ryzen 7 7736U scores 30364, again 0.3% behind. These deltas are tiny, meaning the Ultra 5 225T sits in a crowded performance band where small differences separate close competitors. The database records zero wins for the AMD Ryzen 3 110 in direct comparisons, and zero wins for the Intel part as well, but that is because no head-to-head benchmark entries exist. The only meaningful interpretation is that the Intel chip has measurable performance, and the AMD chip does not have any recorded scores to compare.

FAQ

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen 3 110 have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The database lists no benchmarks for the AMD Ryzen 3 110, so its average benchmark score is 0 and its percentile rank is 50. All recorded performance data comes from the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T.

Q: What is the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T’s best multicore result?

A: The highest multicore score is 21971 in Cinebench R23, followed by 9227 in Cinebench R20 and 2214 in Cinebench R15. Passmark multithread scores 25358.

Q: How does the Intel part compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i9-11980HK, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS, 0.3% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 7 7736U, and 0.3% behind the Intel Core i5-13600H. These are all within a narrow performance margin.

Q: Which chip supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 110 lists ECC memory as true, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T lists ECC memory as false.

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 110 has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 102.4 GB/s. Both use dual-channel DDR5 memory.

Q: Are either of these processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. Both the AMD Ryzen 3 110 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T have multiplierUnlocked set to false.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design families. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 uses the Zen 3+ architecture with the Rembrandt-R codename, built on a 6 nm process at TSMC. It has 4 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.30 GHz. The die size is 210 mm², and the cache layout includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor fits into the AMD Socket FP7, and its integrated graphics is the Radeon 660M. The market segment is mobile, and the release date is listed as 2025-09-30. The part number is 100-000000549(FP7r2).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, built on a 3 nm process, also at TSMC. It has 10 cores and 10 threads, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The transistor count is 17,800 million, and the die size is 243 mm². The cache hierarchy is different: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The processor uses the Intel Socket 1851, and its integrated graphics is the Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. The market segment is desktop, and the release date is listed as 2024-12-31. The part number is unknown.

The process node difference is significant: 6 nm versus 3 nm. The Intel chip also has more than double the cores and a larger cache pool. The AMD chip has a higher base clock, but the Intel chip has a higher boost clock. The Intel part uses PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, while the AMD part uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes. Both support DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, but the Intel part has higher memory bandwidth. The AMD chip supports ECC memory, while the Intel chip does not. The AMD chip is designed for mobile systems, and the Intel chip is designed for desktop systems, which explains the TDP difference of 28 watts versus 65 watts.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports only one conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is the faster processor in every measurable way, but the AMD Ryzen 3 110 is not directly comparable because it has no benchmark scores. The Intel chip’s percentile rank of 82 places it well above the AMD chip’s percentile rank of 50, and the Intel chip’s average benchmark score of 30468 stands against a zero for the AMD chip. The Intel part also has a higher core count, higher boost clock, larger cache, newer process node, and higher memory bandwidth. For anyone choosing between these two based strictly on the database, the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T delivers all recorded performance, while the AMD Ryzen 3 110 offers only specifications.

The AMD Ryzen 3 110 does hold advantages in specific specification areas. It has a lower TDP of 28 watts compared to 65 watts, which matters for power-sensitive mobile designs. It supports ECC memory, which the Intel chip does not. It has a higher base clock of 3.00 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, though the Intel boost clock of 4.90 GHz exceeds the AMD’s 4.30 GHz. The AMD chip also uses a smaller process node in terms of die size at 210 mm² versus 243 mm², though the Intel chip uses a smaller transistor process at 3 nm versus 6 nm. None of these specification advantages translate into measured performance, because the database has no AMD benchmark results.

The nearest rivals for the Intel chip show that it competes closely with several other processors. The 0.2% and 0.3% deltas mean the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T is essentially tied with those four chips. That context matters: the Intel part is not an outlier in its class, but it is a solid mid-range performer. The AMD Ryzen 3 110 has no such comparisons, leaving its position undefined by data.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every specification field. The core count is 4 for AMD versus 10 for Intel. Threads are 8 for AMD versus 10 for Intel. Base clock is 3.00 GHz for AMD versus 2.50 GHz for Intel. Boost clock is 4.30 GHz for AMD versus 4.90 GHz for Intel. TDP is 28 watts for AMD versus 65 watts for Intel. Socket is AMD Socket FP7 versus Intel Socket 1851. Architecture is Zen 3+ versus Arrow Lake. Codename is Rembrandt-R versus Arrow Lake-S. Process node is 6 nm versus 3 nm. Foundry is TSMC for both, but die size is 210 mm² versus 243 mm². Transistor count is not listed for AMD, but Intel lists 17,800 million.

Cache configurations differ substantially. AMD has 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Intel has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 20 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR5 for both, and both use dual-channel buses. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for AMD versus 102.4 GB/s for Intel. ECC memory is true for AMD and false for Intel. PCIe is Gen 4 with 20 lanes for AMD versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon 660M for AMD versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU for Intel. Market segment is mobile for AMD versus desktop for Intel. Release date is 2025-09-30 for AMD versus 2024-12-31 for Intel. Both have multiplierUnlocked as false. The AMD part number is 100-000000549(FP7r2), while the Intel part number is unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 110 wins in power efficiency. Its TDP of 28 watts is less than half of the Intel part’s 65 watts, which makes it suited for thin-and-light mobile devices where thermal and battery constraints dominate. It also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the Intel chip, which can matter for systems requiring error correction in memory-heavy workloads. The higher base clock of 3.00 GHz might help in lightly threaded tasks that stay at base frequency, but the Intel chip’s higher boost clock of 4.90 GHz likely overtakes that in practice. The AMD chip’s smaller die size of 210 mm² could indicate lower manufacturing cost, but no pricing data exists to confirm that.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins in every recorded performance category. The Cinebench scores confirm strong multicore throughput, with the R23 multicore result of 21971 being roughly ten times the R15 result of 2214, showing good scaling. The Passmark results cover a wide range of workloads, from integer math at 59543 to floating point math at 82751, and the multithread score of 25358 supports heavy parallel workloads. The single-thread score of 4348 indicates solid per-core performance, which benefits everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. The Intel chip also has a larger L3 cache at 20 MB versus 8 MB, which helps with data reuse in complex workloads. Its PCIe Gen 5 support doubles the interface generation compared to the AMD chip’s Gen 4, offering higher bandwidth for compatible devices.

For use-case selection, the data points to the Intel part for any task where measured performance matters: rendering, compilation, simulation, or general desktop use. The AMD part fits a niche for low-power mobile systems and ECC-capable builds, but its lack of benchmark data means no performance claims can be made from the database. The Intel chip’s average benchmark score of 30468 and percentile rank of 82 place it clearly in the upper half of all CPUs, while the AMD chip’s percentile rank of 50 with a zero score is purely nominal. The choice is straightforward for performance, but the AMD chip retains a purpose for efficiency-focused deployments.