AMD's next-gen 10-core 'Medusa Point' APU shows up on Geekbench again, with its best score yet — leaked SKU outpaces every other x86 mobile chip in the single-core test ⁠67%

By Hassam Nasir⁠82%

7/19/2026, 2:35:00 PM

BS Summary: This article contains 25 faulty reasoning types, including Hasty Generalization, Confirmation Bias, and Halo Effect, with Biased Writer Voice as the most egregious example at 64.7% saturation with 312 hits. Analysis detected 1,511 faulty-reasoning hits from 482 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 60.4% and a BS Rank of ⁠67% (7,368 of 21,887 articles). This article is worse (more manipulative) than 66.30% of the article peer group.

AMD is expected to refresh both its desktop and mobile lineups with Zen 6 next year. 
Ryzen AI 500 series, codenamed Medusa Point, will be the company's next-gen mobile family and we've already seen a 10-core part leak from it a couple of times. 
Now, that same SKU is back with another Geekbench listing, this time posting its best results that put it ahead of any mobile chip currently made by Intel or AMD (in one way). 
(Image credit: Future) AMD's upcoming chip ended up scoring 3,329 points in the single-core test and 16,555 points in the multi-core test. 
The Geekbench page once again shows the platform name as "AMD Plum-MDS1," which we've known to be associated with Medusa Point for a while now. 
The SKU is listed as "AMD Eng Sample 100-000001713-33_N," which is identical to how we saw in the last leak , basically confirming we're looking at the same chip. 
The single-core result is almost 5% higher while the multi-core score is about 9.7% higher compared to the numbers we saw previously. 
In fact, the single-core result is better than any mobile part on Geekbench apart from the new Snapdragon X2 Elite lineup. 
Compared to desktop equivalents, it's very close to the 9900X and the 9800X3D — two absolute desktop powerhouses carrying 12 cores and 8 cores, respectively. 
Qualcomm X2 Elite X2E-90-100 
Intel Core i9-14900KS 
Intel Core Ultra 9 285K 
AMD Ryzen 9 565? 
(Previous) 
The multi-core score puts this 10-core SKU right alongside the Ryzen AI Max+ 390, which is just a tier below the top-end AI Max+ 395 from Strix Halo. 
Since this is a 10-core part, we can infer it's the Ryzen AI 9 565 because the Ryzen AI 9 365 (from Strix Point) and Ryzen AI 9 465 (from Gorgon Point) share the same configs. 
The Ryzen AI 9 365 has an average score of 12,410, so Medusa Point's offering is 33% faster in this regard. 
The Geekbench listing also reports the correct clock speeds this time — 2.0 GHz is still lasted as the base frequency, but the boost frequency is marked at 5.37 GHz, which makes a lot more sense. 
Moreover, the listing shows 10MB of L2 cache and 32MB of L3 cache while the Ryzen AI 9 465 had a combined cache tally of 34MB. 
Overall, this benchmark is an incredibly promising showing for Medusa Point. 
The Red Team's next-gen mobile lineup seems to benefit heavily from an architectural jump thanks to the Zen 6 silicon. 
Keep in mind that this is the company's mainstream mobile offering that's supposed to compete with Intel's Panther Lake , while Nova Lake mobile and AMD's own Gator Range (Ryzen 10000) will serve only as high-end CPUs. 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 23.0%Hassam Nasir: 4.0%Tom's Hardware: 3.8%Confirmation Bias23.0%This article: 14.3%Hassam Nasir: 5.8%Tom's Hardware: 2.3%Anchoring Bias14.3%This article: 10.2%Hassam Nasir: 1.1%Tom's Hardware: 3.5%Availability Heuristic10.2%This article: 7.5%Hassam Nasir: 1.6%Tom's Hardware: 1.1%Representativeness Heuristic7.5%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.5%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 4.4%Hassam Nasir: 3.2%Tom's Hardware: 3.5%Overconfidence Bias4.4%This article: 7.7%Hassam Nasir: 9.1%Tom's Hardware: 9.2%Framing Effect7.7%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 2.6%Tom's Hardware: 0.9%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.6%Tom's Hardware: 0.7%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 17.2%Hassam Nasir: 14.5%Tom's Hardware: 6.0%Optimism Bias17.2%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 1.2%Tom's Hardware: 2.0%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.5%Tom's Hardware: 6.5%Negativity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 1.3%Self-Serving Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Hassam Nasir: 0.4%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%Fundamental Attribution Error4.1%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 4.1%Hassam Nasir: 1.1%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%In-Group Bias4.1%This article: 7.7%Hassam Nasir: 1.4%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias7.7%This article: 22.4%Hassam Nasir: 4.2%Tom's Hardware: 2.8%Halo Effect22.4%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.8%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 18.7%Hassam Nasir: 4.1%Tom's Hardware: 2.0%Recency Bias18.7%This article: 5.2%Hassam Nasir: 1.2%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%Primacy Effect5.2%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Straw Man0.0%This article: 5.2%Hassam Nasir: 2.4%Tom's Hardware: 5.4%Appeal to Authority5.2%This article: 7.7%Hassam Nasir: 3.5%Tom's Hardware: 2.0%False Dilemma7.7%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 1.0%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 6.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.7%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Circular Reasoning6.0%This article: 27.0%Hassam Nasir: 14.7%Tom's Hardware: 6.1%Hasty Generalization27.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Red Herring0.0%This article: 6.0%Hassam Nasir: 2.9%Tom's Hardware: 1.1%Bandwagon6.0%This article: 5.2%Hassam Nasir: 2.3%Tom's Hardware: 3.0%Appeal to Emotion5.2%This article: 7.5%Hassam Nasir: 2.3%Tom's Hardware: 0.8%Begging the Question7.5%This article: 4.1%Hassam Nasir: 1.5%Tom's Hardware: 3.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)4.1%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.8%Burden of Proof0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.3%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 1.3%Tom's Hardware: 0.6%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 5.8%Hassam Nasir: 1.2%Tom's Hardware: 1.6%Anecdotal5.8%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 20.1%Hassam Nasir: 4.1%Tom's Hardware: 3.4%Ambiguity (Equivocation)20.1%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.4%Tom's Hardware: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 4.4%Tom's Hardware: 2.4%Unattributed Quote0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.9%Quote-first Misdirection0.0%This article: 64.7%Hassam Nasir: 17.0%Tom's Hardware: 7.1%Biased Writer Voice64.7%This article: 7.7%Hassam Nasir: 6.5%Tom's Hardware: 1.3%Indoctrination7.7%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.1%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 0.0%Tom's Hardware: 0.0%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Hassam Nasir: 7.9%Tom's Hardware: 3.3%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

482 words analyzed.

Speakers

No attributed speakers were identified in this analysis.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.