AMD may be teasing reveal of new mobile chip

AMD is using its Twitter account and a teaser website to give people a tiny glimpse of an upcoming processor announcement. Based on the teaser site, it looks like the reveal will be made early Tuesday morning Eastern time.

The AMD Twitter account stated earlier this week the company has a "BIG" announcement about something "SMALL". The post has a link to the actual teaser page which shows an extreme closeup of what is likely the processor itself.

Based on the teaser, it's possible AMD is getting ready to reveal some kind of new mobile processor that might be used in tablets and small laptops. The company previously announced its 2014 roadmap for desktop PC processors.

Earlier this month, AMD announced its latest financial results for the first quarter of 2014. It brought in $1.40 billion for the quarter, up 28 percent from the same period a year ago. The company recorded a net loss of $20 million for the quarter, but that was a lot better than the $146 million loss it experienced a year ago.

Source: AMD | Image via AMD

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft issues security advisory for Internet Explorer exploit

Next Story

Comixology iOS users slam decision to get rid of in-app purchases

26 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Probably an official announcement of its 10W to 20W Beema SoC which is based on a tweaked Jaguar core that is in the Xbox One and PS4. So this could be the most powerful graphics APU for low cost systems. The claim is that it offers 250% more performance in graphics than Intel's Bay Trail.

not much partners can do if they don't release a compelling CPU and chipset to match. The last thing they did for the high end still runs on PCIe 2.0

Cause we've maxxed out PCIe 2.0?

Not even close, even the 4x is fast enough for even high end cards. (not to sure if the titan does not bottleneck it, my GTX760 doesn't at least)

Shadowzz said,
Cause we've maxxed out PCIe 2.0?

Not even close, even the 4x is fast enough for even high end cards. (not to sure if the titan does not bottleneck it, my GTX760 doesn't at least)


high end cards definitely benefit from it, and now that crossfire runs from the PCIe bus it's another reason to get up to speed (get it? up to speed. I'll show myself out.)

trojan_market said,
I like AMD. they had bad years recently but they are always steps ahead in raw power.

Thank you

trojan_market said,
I like AMD. they had bad years recently but they are always steps ahead in raw power.

Unfortunately, they aren't. In every benchmark, intel trumps AMD, on all tests. Even with faster clock speeds than intel chips, they are still much less efficient and take more cycles to calculate things.

trojan_market said,
I like AMD. they had bad years recently but they are always steps ahead in raw power.

Benchmarks show otherwise.

n_K said,

Unfortunately, they aren't. In every benchmark, intel trumps AMD, on all tests. Even with faster clock speeds than intel chips, they are still much less efficient and take more cycles to calculate things.

What?

The FX dominates on multithreaded benchmarks.

Single threading, yeah wow. who cares. Single Threading is a thing of the 80s.

Shadowzz said,
Single threading, yeah wow. who cares. Single Threading is a thing of the 80s.
Oh yeah, just look at a majority of video games and web browsers—wait a second...

Shadowzz said,

What?

The FX dominates on multithreaded benchmarks.

Single threading, yeah wow. who cares. Single Threading is a thing of the 80s.


Take a look at the benchmarks for the HP DL160 G7 server and the HP DL165 server. The 165 is newer, has an AMD chipset with 12 cores whilst the 160 can have up to 8 cores... What do the benchmarks say? Oh surprise surprise, the 8 core intel absolutely smashes the 12 core AMD.
I'm glad AMD still exists, but to say their products are better is just plain wrong.

n_K said,

Take a look at the benchmarks for the HP DL160 G7 server and the HP DL165 server. The 165 is newer, has an AMD chipset with 12 cores whilst the 160 can have up to 8 cores... What do the benchmarks say? Oh surprise surprise, the 8 core intel absolutely smashes the 12 core AMD.
I'm glad AMD still exists, but to say their products are better is just plain wrong.

Better for my wallet ;).

Pluto is a Planet said,
Oh yeah, just look at a majority of video games and web browsers—wait a second...

Yeah majority of games released recently are multithreaded, AA titles at least.
IE multithreads, Chrome multithreads, FX sorta attempts to multithread.

Not AMD's fault that developers lack the skill to do simple optimizations. Since everyone and their dog has multi core/thread CPU's.

common guys you have to be reasonable and compare processor by price range. yes Intel is the X86 processors technology keeper and AMD cannot use technology intel have been guarding for years. but for the price of an intel i7 processor you can buy server class AMD opteron processor which is a head above that processor. as I said AMD had bad years but who remember Athlon X64 processor which was basically beginning of current generation 64 bit processors. those days not only intel didnot have 64 bit processors (they added 64bit extention to some processor model later) but also AMD was much better in processing power, graphics and everything else. then intel came up with core 2 duo and then i series processors and took the crown back but AMD was the first one who created modern X64 processors.

ZipZapRap said,
Interested to see what this is, roll on Tuesday. We need a strong AMD!

Barring the FX, their current lineup is stronger than it's been in a long time. I'm hoping things continue to improve. :)

Are they going to make a real chip that can go head to head against the i7? Or should we just wait for its demise so we all can spend $900 for a CPU again once it goes out of business.

Even if Intel was only competing with itself in the desktop market, they couldn't raise the prices too much as people would have less of an incentive to buy desktop systems (which sales are down for already).

sinetheo said,
Are they going to make a real chip that can go head to head against the i7? Or should we just wait for its demise so we all can spend $900 for a CPU again once it goes out of business.


Pretty sure you can already spend $900 for CPU.