Microsoft Reportedly Prototyping Surface Devices With Qualcomm and AMD Chips
- Mehedi Hassan
- Jun 25, 2019
-
45
Microsoft is expected to introduce its new Surface lineup of devices this Fall. This time around, though, there might be a little twist. According to a new report from Brad Sams on Petri, Microsoft is toying with the idea of putting non-Intel chips on some of the next-gen Surface devices.
It’s no secret that Microsoft’s relationship with Intel internally hasn’t been smooth, pushing Microsoft to start thinking about moving away from Intel. The company is apparently testing a 12nm AMD Picasso SoC on a variation of the Surface Laptop, according to Petri.
Windows Intelligence In Your Inbox
Sign up for our new free newsletter to get three time-saving tips each Friday — and get free copies of Paul Thurrott's Windows 11 and Windows 10 Field Guides (normally $9.99) as a special welcome gift!
"*" indicates required fields
And on the Surface Pro, Microsoft is testing a custom SoC that could potentially power the next Surface Pro device. The company is working “extremely” closely with Qualcomm to build the new custom SoC codenamed Excalibur for the ARM Surface Pro. The custom SoC is being built closely with Qualcomm based on Microsoft’s own specifications to work better on Windows 10. Microsoft may also use the new SoC as a reference device for its OEM partners.
Here’s the thing, though: Microsoft will continue to rely on Intel for its other devices, including new Surface Book, and Pro 7. Microsoft’s new Surface Pro 7 will continue to feature a similar design to the Pro 6, and Microsoft will finally introduce a USB-C port on the device. The company was originally planning to introduce a new look for this year’s Surface Pro, though that’s apparently been pushed till next year.
October will be a big month for Redmond and Microsoft finally leading the Windows-on-ARM space with an ARM Surface Pro might just change Windows laptops as we know it.
Tagged with
Conversation 45 comments
-
skane2600
<p>They shouldn't call any Surface device "Pro" if they're going to use an ARM chip unless the point is to rhyme with "Slow". Nobody wants a new RT device or wants to emulate Win32.</p>
-
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#437747">In reply to digiguy:</a></em></blockquote><p>ARM native performance isn't really the key question. I haven't read any new review of Windows on ARM that indicates that emulation performance has been improved, do you have a link?</p>
-
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#437622">In reply to craigb:</a></em></blockquote><p>Besides any technical challenges with respect to coordinating the use of two different CPU architectures, it seems that the only advantage ARM would have would be lower power consumption and having two chips would likely erase that advantage. </p>
-
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#437665">In reply to hrlngrv:</a></em></blockquote><p>It wonder what impact Win32 emulation would have on power savings. I imagine it would take a lot of RISC instructions to implement CISC instructions in software. </p>
-
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#437750">In reply to Greg Green:</a></em></blockquote><p>I was talking about the effect of Win32 emulation, not ARM native.</p>
-
dontbe evil
<blockquote><em><a href="#437665">In reply to hrlngrv:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>lighter, cooler and thinner device, 4g/5g integration … possibility to run apps natively compiled for ARM (will be nice to see the benchmarks with native ones)</p>
-
Stooks
<blockquote><em><a href="#437682">In reply to dontbe_evil:</a></em></blockquote><p>"possibility to run apps natively compiled for ARM"</p><p><br></p><p>I am sure that is right around the corner.</p>
-
Stooks
<blockquote><em><a href="#437665">In reply to hrlngrv:</a></em></blockquote><p>None IMHO. Windows on ARM has been a failure since Windows Phone 7, for one reason….lack of native apps.</p><p><br></p><p>If you believe all the rumors this time it will work with a combination of PWA's, Android apps and Win32/32bit emulation.</p><p><br></p><p>Where do I NOT sign up?</p>
-
skane2600
<blockquote><em><a href="#437748">In reply to Greg Green:</a></em></blockquote><p>That's a lot of "if's". Low-level Intel laptops are around $200. The users who would be most likely to find battery life critical, probably would demand better performance anyway.</p>
-
Thom77
<blockquote><em><a href="#437813">In reply to glenn8878:</a></em></blockquote><p><br></p><p>I played Skyrim on my entry level Go with over 100 mods for over 8 hours straight last week connected to a portable battery bank.</p><p><br></p><p>Seemed fast enough to me</p>