AMD Ryzen 3 210 vs AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data for these two mobile processors shows a clear split. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 wins 12 of the recorded comparisons, while the AMD Ryzen 3 210 takes only 3. The margin of victory for the Ryzen AI 7 445 is often substantial, particularly in multi-threaded and math-heavy workloads.

The largest single gap appears in PassMark floating point math, where the Ryzen AI 7 445 scores 39,362 against 23,649 for the Ryzen 3 210, a 39.9% advantage. Integer math shows a similar pattern: 58,332 versus 37,933, a 35% difference. These are large deltas for processors in the same power envelope, and they indicate that the Ryzen AI 7 445's architecture handles arithmetic workloads with considerably more efficiency.

Cinebench results are more nuanced. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ryzen AI 7 445 scores 1,723 against 1,128, a 34.5% lead. The single-core R15 result also favors the Ryzen AI 7 445 at 254 versus 159, a 37.4% margin. However, in Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ryzen 3 210 strikes back: it scores 11,198 versus 10,590, a 5.7% win. That reversal is notable because R23 is a longer, more sustained load, and the Ryzen 3 210's higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz appears to help it maintain performance where shorter R15 runs favor the 6-core part.

Single-threaded PassMark tells a different story from Cinebench R23 single-core. In PassMark single-thread, the Ryzen 3 210 scores 3,724 versus 3,591, a 3.7% win. But in Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ryzen AI 7 445 leads with 1,806 versus 1,581, a 12.5% margin. This divergence suggests the two tests stress different aspects of the core: PassMark's single-thread suite responds better to the Ryzen 3 210's higher clock, while Cinebench R23's rendering workload favors the newer Zen 5 core design of the Ryzen AI 7 445.

Data compression and encryption also go strongly to the Ryzen AI 7 445. Compression scores 215,812 versus 152,017, a 29.6% lead. Encryption scores 10,519 versus 8,607, an 18.2% lead. Extended instructions, which include SIMD and other vector workloads, show a 27.6% advantage for the Ryzen AI 7 445 at 15,826 versus 11,464. Prime number finding, a test sensitive to branch prediction and integer throughput, gives the Ryzen AI 7 445 a 12.5% edge at 56 versus 49.

The Ryzen AI 7 445 also wins the PassMark physics test (976 versus 821, a 15.9% lead), multithread overall (18,115 versus 13,585, a 25% lead), and random string sorting (23,488 versus 19,454, a 17.2% lead). The Ryzen 3 210's only other win beyond Cinebench R23 multi-core and the two PassMark single-thread entries is not present; its three total wins are exactly those three tests.

Where Each One Wins

The data paints a clear picture of workload suitability. The Ryzen AI 7 445 is the stronger processor for nearly every compute-intensive task. Its wins span rendering (Cinebench R15), encryption, compression, floating point, integer math, physics simulation, and extended instruction sets. That coverage makes it the better choice for content creation, data processing, scientific computing, and any workload that can use more threads or wider SIMD units.

The Ryzen 3 210's wins are concentrated in two areas: sustained multi-core rendering under Cinebench R23 and a specific PassMark single-thread test. The R23 multi-core result is particularly interesting because it contradicts the R15 multi-core result. The likely explanation is the combination of a 4-core, 8-thread configuration with a 4.70 GHz boost clock versus the 6-core, 12-thread part at 4.60 GHz. Under a longer load, the Ryzen 3 210's higher clock and lower thread count can sustain boost more effectively, while the Ryzen AI 7 445's extra cores may hit thermal or power limits that reduce its advantage.

For single-threaded PassMark, the Ryzen 3 210's clock advantage shows directly: 3,724 versus 3,591. This test appears to reward raw frequency more than architectural efficiency. So users whose primary workload is a lightly threaded application that responds to clock speed, such as certain legacy software or some database operations, might see a small benefit from the Ryzen 3 210. But the Cinebench R23 single-core result (1,806 versus 1,581, a 12.5% win for the Ryzen AI 7 445) shows that newer rendering engines prefer the Zen 5 core even at a 100 MHz clock disadvantage.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different generations of AMD's core designs. The Ryzen 3 210 uses Zen 4 architecture, codenamed Hawk Point, and belongs to the Ryzen 3 generation. The Ryzen AI 7 445 uses Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Gorgon Point, and belongs to the Ryzen AI 400 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores.

Both are built on TSMC's 4 nm process node. The Ryzen 3 210 has a die size of 137 mm² with 20,900 million transistors. The Ryzen AI 7 445's die size and transistor count are not recorded in the database. The process node being identical means architectural differences, not lithography, drive the performance gap.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Ryzen 3 210 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has 6 cores and 12 threads. That extra core pair and thread pair explain much of the multi-threaded advantage, but not all of it: the 34.5% R15 multi-core lead is larger than the 50% core count increase would suggest, indicating the Zen 5 core is also more efficient per thread.

Cache layouts also differ. The Ryzen 3 210 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and only 4 MB of L3. The smaller L3 on the Ryzen AI 7 445 is a notable trade-off: it has half the shared cache of the Ryzen 3 210. Yet it still wins most benchmarks, suggesting that the Zen 5 core's prefetch and memory access patterns compensate for the reduced cache capacity.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Ryzen 3 210 uses a Radeon 740M, while the Ryzen AI 7 445 uses a Radeon 840M. Both are integrated solutions, so they share system memory, but the database does not record further details on shader counts or clock speeds.

Memory support shows a difference in flexibility. The Ryzen 3 210 supports DDR5 only. The Ryzen AI 7 445 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, which gives it access to lower-power memory configurations in thin-and-light laptops. Both use a dual-channel memory bus and both record a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support also differs: the Ryzen 3 210 does not support ECC, while the Ryzen AI 7 445 does.

Both processors use the same PCIe configuration: Gen 4 with 14 lanes from the CPU. Both are unlocked in terms of multiplier? No, both have multiplierUnlocked set to false, so neither supports overclocking. Both are active production parts in the mobile segment.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specifications:

• Cores: 4 (Ryzen 3 210) versus 6 (Ryzen AI 7 445)
• Threads: 8 versus 12
• Base clock: 3.00 GHz versus 2.00 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.70 GHz versus 4.60 GHz
• Socket: AMD Socket FP7 versus AMD Socket FP8
• Architecture: Zen 4 versus Zen 5
• Codename: Hawk Point versus Gorgon Point
• L1 cache: 64 KB per core versus 80 KB per core
• L3 cache: 8 MB shared versus 4 MB
• Memory support: DDR5 versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X
• ECC memory: Not supported versus supported
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 740M versus Radeon 840M
• Release date: 2025-01-05 versus 2026-01-04
• Part number: 100-000001612 versus 100-000001935

Identical between the two: manufacturer (AMD), TDP (28 watts), process node (4 nm TSMC), foundry (TSMC), L2 cache (1 MB per core), memory bus (dual-channel), memory bandwidth (89.6 GB/s), PCIe (Gen 4, 14 lanes), market segment (mobile), production status (active), and multiplier unlocked status (false).

The release dates are nearly one year apart: the Ryzen 3 210 launched on January 5, 2025, and the Ryzen AI 7 445 on January 4, 2026. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has higher single-thread performance?

A: It depends on the benchmark. The Ryzen 3 210 wins PassMark single-thread with 3,724 versus 3,591, a 3.7% lead. The Ryzen AI 7 445 wins Cinebench R23 single-core with 1,806 versus 1,581, a 12.5% lead, and Cinebench R15 single-core with 254 versus 159, a 37.4% lead.

Q: Why does the Ryzen 3 210 win Cinebench R23 multi-core despite having fewer cores?

A: The Ryzen 3 210 scores 11,198 versus 10,590, a 5.7% win. It has a higher boost clock at 4.70 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. Under a sustained load, the 4-core part can maintain its boost more effectively, while the 6-core Ryzen AI 7 445 may hit power or thermal limits that reduce its multi-core advantage.

Q: Does the Ryzen AI 7 445 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the database records ECC memory support as true for the Ryzen AI 7 445. The Ryzen 3 210 does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Ryzen 3 210 supports DDR5 only. The Ryzen AI 7 445 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The Ryzen 3 210 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ryzen AI 7 445 has 4 MB. The Ryzen AI 7 445 compensates with a larger L1 cache: 80 KB per core versus 64 KB per core.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each?

A: The Ryzen 3 210 ranks in the 71st percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ryzen AI 7 445 ranks in the 79th percentile. The average benchmark score is 17,321 for the Ryzen 3 210 and 26,936 for the Ryzen AI 7 445.

The Verdict

The recorded data favors the AMD Ryzen AI 7 445 in nearly every measurable way. It wins 12 of 15 head-to-head comparisons. Its average benchmark score is 26,936 versus 17,321 for the Ryzen 3 210, a 55.5% advantage in aggregate performance. It places in the 79th percentile of all CPUs versus the 71st percentile for the Ryzen 3 210.

The Ryzen AI 7 445's strengths are broad: it leads by 34.5% in Cinebench R15 multi-core, by 29.6% in data compression, by 35% in integer math, and by 39.9% in floating point math. It offers more cores, more threads, a newer Zen 5 architecture, ECC support, and LPDDR5X compatibility. The only areas where the Ryzen 3 210 wins are a narrow PassMark single-thread result (3.7%) and a single Cinebench R23 multi-core run (5.7%). In the R23 single-core test, the Ryzen AI 7 445 recovers its advantage with a 12.5% lead.

The Ryzen 3 210's case rests on two factors: a 100 MHz higher boost clock and a larger 8 MB L3 cache. Those help in specific scenarios, particularly the PassMark single-thread test and the sustained R23 multi-core workload. For users running exclusively those types of tasks, the Ryzen 3 210 delivers a measurable but small benefit. For every other workload in the database, the Ryzen AI 7 445 is the stronger part.

The socket difference (FP7 versus FP8) means these are not drop-in alternatives for the same motherboard. A system built for one will not accept the other. Given the performance gap, a platform designed for the Ryzen AI 7 445 offers more headroom across the board. The Ryzen 3 210 remains a capable mobile processor, but the data positions it clearly below the Ryzen AI 7 445 in overall capability. Users prioritizing multi-threaded throughput, math-heavy processing, or memory flexibility should select the Ryzen AI 7 445. Users with a specific workload that matches the Ryzen 3 210's clock-sensitive wins may find its results acceptable, but the breadth of the Ryzen AI 7 445's victories makes it the stronger default choice.