Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 25, 2010

OR

For the transition period from                      to                     

Commission File Number 001-07882

ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(408) 749-4000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes  x  No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.  Yes  ¨  No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes  x  No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files):  Yes  x  No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act (check one):

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined by Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes  ¨  No  x

As of June 26, 2010, the aggregate market value of the registrant’s common stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $4.6 billion based on the reported closing sale price of $8.09 per share as reported on the New York Stock Exchange on June 25, 2010, which was the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 685,229,616 shares of common stock, $0.01 par value per share, as of February 14, 2011.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which we expect will be held on or about May 3, 2011 (2011 Proxy Statement) are incorporated into Part II and Part III hereof.

Table of Contents

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.

FORM 10-K

For The Fiscal Year Ended December 25, 2010

INDEX

Table of Contents

PART I

Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

The statements in this report include forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations and beliefs and involve numerous risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from expectations. These forward-looking statements should not be relied upon as predictions of future events as we cannot assure you that the events or circumstances reflected in these statements will be achieved or will occur. You can identify forward-looking statements by the use of forward-looking terminology including “believes,” “expects,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “seeks,” “intends,” “plans,” “pro forma,” “estimates,” or “anticipates” or the negative of these words and phrases or other variations of these words and phrases or comparable terminology. The forward-looking statements relate to, among other things: demand for our products; the timing of new product releases and technology transitions; the growth and competitive landscape of the markets in which we participate; capital expenditures; our planned research and development spending; the outcome of legal proceedings and the related impact of such outcome on our financial condition or results of operations; our future payments to GLOBALFOUNDRIES Inc., or GF, under the wafer purchase agreement; our product roadmap; the non-cash gain we expect to recognize in the first quarter of 2011 as a result of the dilution of our equity interest in GF; our opportunity in 2011 in the server market; the operating results of the Handheld business unit; the level of international sales as compared to total sales; unrecognized tax benefits; and availability of external financing. Material factors and assumptions that were applied in making these forward-looking statements include, without limitation, the following: the expected rate of market growth and demand for our products and technologies (and the mix thereof); our expected market share; our expected product costs and average selling price; our overall competitive position and the competitiveness of our current and future products; our ability to introduce new products, consistent with our current roadmap; our ability to raise sufficient capital on favorable terms; our ability to make additional investment in research and development and that such opportunities will be available; our ability to realize the anticipated benefits of our fabless business model; the expected demand for computers; our current expectations regarding GF’s manufacturing yields, wafer volumes and demand for our products and the state of credit markets and macroeconomic conditions. Material factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, without limitation, the following: that Intel Corporation’s pricing, marketing and rebating programs, product bundling, standard setting, new product introductions or other activities may negatively impact our plans; that we may be unable to develop, launch and ramp new products and technologies in the volumes that are required by the market at mature yields on a timely basis; that our third party foundries will be unable to manufacture our products on a timely basis in sufficient quantities and using competitive technologies; that we will be unable to obtain sufficient manufacturing capacity or components to meet demand for our products or will under-utilize our commitment with respect to GFs microprocessor manufacturing facilities; that we may be unable to realize the anticipated benefits of our fabless business model or our relationship with GF because, among other things, the synergies expected from the transaction may not be fully realized or may take longer to realize than expected; that customers stop buying our products or materially reduce their operations or demand for our products; that we may be unable to maintain the level of investment in research and development that is required to remain competitive; that there may be unexpected variations in market growth and demand for our products and technologies in light of the product mix that we may have available at any particular time or a decline in demand; that our substantial indebtedness could adversely affect our financial position and prevent us from implementing our strategy or fulfilling our contractual obligations; that we will require additional funding and may be unable to raise sufficient capital on favorable terms, or at all; that global business and economic conditions will not continue to improve or will worsen; that demand for computers will be lower than currently expected and the effect of political or economic instability, domestically or internationally, on our sales or supply chain.

For a discussion of the factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the forward-looking statements, see “Part I, Item 1A—Risk Factors” and the “Financial Condition” section set forth in “Part II, Item 7—Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” or MD&A,

1

Table of Contents

beginning on page 39 below and such other risks and uncertainties as set forth below in this report or detailed in our other Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reports and filings. We assume no obligation to update forward-looking statements.

General

We are a global semiconductor company with facilities around the world. Within the global semiconductor industry, we offer primarily:

For financial information about geographic areas and for segment information with respect to revenues and operating results, refer to the information set forth in Note 13 of our consolidated financial statements, beginning on page 111 below.

Additional Information

We were incorporated under the laws of Delaware on May 1, 1969 and became a publicly held company in 1972. Since 1979 our common stock has been listed on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol “AMD.” Our mailing address and executive offices are located at One AMD Place, Sunnyvale, California 94088, and our telephone number is (408) 749-4000. References in this report to “AMD,” “we,” “us,” “management,” “our,” or the “Company” means Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries.

AMD, the AMD Arrow logo, ATI, the ATI logo, AMD Athlon, AMD Opteron, AMD Phenom, AMD Sempron, AMD Turion, FirePro, FireStream, FireMV, CrossFire, Radeon, and combinations thereof are trademarks of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Microsoft, Windows, Windows Vista, and DirectX are registered trademarks of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other jurisdictions. HyperTransport is a licensed trademark of the HyperTransport Technology Consortium. Other names are for informational purposes only and may be trademarks of their respective owners.

Website Access to Company Reports and Corporate Governance Documents

We post on the Investor Relations pages of our Web site, www.amd.com, a link to our filings with the SEC, our Principles of Corporate Governance, our Code of Ethics for our Executive Officers and all other senior finance executives, our “Worldwide Standards of Business Conduct,” which applies to our Board of Directors and all of our employees, and the charters of our Audit and Finance, Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance committees of our Board of Directors. Our filings with the SEC are posted as soon as reasonably practical after they are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. You can also obtain copies of these documents by writing to us at: Corporate Secretary, AMD, 7171 Southwest Parkway, M/S 100, Austin, Texas 78735, or emailing us at: Corporate.Secretary@amd.com. All of these documents and filings are available free of charge. Please note that information contained on our Web site is not incorporated by reference in, or considered to be a part of, this report.

Our Industry

Semiconductors are components used in a variety of electronic products and systems. An integrated circuit, or IC, is a semiconductor device that consists of many interconnected transistors on a single chip. Since the invention of the transistor in 1948, improvements in IC process and design technologies have led to the

2

Table of Contents

development of smaller, more complex and more reliable ICs at a lower cost per function. In order to satisfy the demand for faster, smaller and lower-cost ICs, semiconductor companies have continually developed improvements in manufacturing and process technology and design. ICs are increasingly being manufactured using smaller geometries on larger silicon wafers. Use of smaller process geometries can result in products that are higher performing, use less power and cost less to manufacture on a per unit basis.

Computing Solutions

The x86 Microprocessor Market

A microprocessor is an IC that serves as the central processing unit, or CPU, of a computer. It generally consists of millions of transistors that process data and control other devices in the system, acting as the brain of the computer. The performance of a microprocessor is a critical factor impacting the performance of a computer and numerous other electronic systems. The principal indicators of CPU performance are work-per-cycle, or how many instructions are executed per cycle, clock speed, representing the rate at which a CPU’s internal logic operates, measured in units of hertz, or cycles per second, and power consumption. Other factors impacting microprocessor performance include the number of CPUs, or cores, on a microprocessor, the bit rating of the microprocessor, memory size and data access speed.

Developments in circuit design and manufacturing process technologies have resulted in significant advances in microprocessor performance. Currently, microprocessors are designed to process 32-bits or 64-bits of information at one time. The bit rating of a microprocessor generally denotes the largest size of numerical data that a microprocessor can handle. Microprocessors with 64-bit processing capabilities enable systems to have greater performance by allowing software applications and operating systems to access more memory.

Moreover, as businesses and consumers require greater performance from their computer systems due to the growth of digital data and increasingly sophisticated software applications, semiconductor companies are designing and developing multi-core microprocessors, where multiple processor cores are placed on a single die or in a single processor. Multi-core microprocessors offer enhanced overall system performance and efficiency because computing tasks can be spread across two or more processing cores each of which can execute a task at full speed. Moreover, multiple processor cores packaged together can increase performance of a computer system without greatly increasing the total amount of power consumed and the total amount of heat emitted. This type of “symmetrical multiprocessing” is effective in both multi-tasking environments where multiple cores can enable operating systems to prioritize and manage tasks from multiple software applications simultaneously and also for “multi-threaded” software applications where multiple cores can process different parts of the software program, or “threads,” simultaneously thereby enhancing performance of the application. Businesses and consumers also require computer systems with improved power management technology, which allows them to reduce the power consumption of their computer systems thereby reducing the total cost of ownership.

While general purpose computer architectures based on the x86 architecture are sufficient for many customers, for selected applications, an architecture that enables the ideal resource to be used for a given workload can provide a substantial improvement in user experience, performance and energy efficiency. In this environment, we believe an accelerated computing architecture can benefit customers. An accelerated computing architecture enables “offloading” of selected tasks, thereby optimizing the use of multiple computational units such as the CPU and graphics processing unit, or GPU, depending on the application or workload. For example, serial workloads are better suited for CPUs, while highly parallel tasks may be better performed by a GPU. Our AMD Fusion Accelerated Processing Unit, or APU, combines our CPU and GPU onto a single piece of silicon. We believe that high performance computing workloads, workloads that are visual in nature and even traditional applications such as photo and video editing or other multi-media applications can benefit from our accelerated computing architecture.

3

Table of Contents

Microprocessor Products

We currently offer microprocessor products for servers, notebooks and desktop PCs and other consumer devices. We base our microprocessors and chipsets on the x86 instruction set architecture and AMD’s Direct Connect Architecture, which connects an on-chip memory controller and input/output, or I/O, channels directly to one or more microprocessor cores. We typically integrate two or more processor cores onto a single die, and each core has its own dedicated cache, which is memory that is located on the semiconductor die, permitting quicker access to frequently used data and instructions. Some of our microprocessors have additional levels of cache such as L2, or second level cache, and L3, or third level cache, to enable faster data access and higher performance. In March 2010, we launched Direct Connect Architecture 2.0 as part of the AMD Opteron™ 6000 Series platform. Direct Connect Architecture 2.0 is designed to improve performance as memory is accessed more directly, resulting in increased bandwidth and reduced memory latencies.

Our processors and chipsets support multiple generations of HyperTransport™ technology, which is a high-bandwidth communications interface that enables higher levels of multi-processor performance and scalability over traditional front side bus-based microprocessor technology. Energy efficiency and power consumption continue to be key design principles for our products. We focus on continually improving power management technology, or “performance-per-watt.” To that end, we offer processors and chipsets with features that we have designed to reduce system level energy consumption, with multiple levels of lower clock speed and voltage states that reduce processor power consumption during idle times. We design our microprocessors to be compatible with operating system software such as the Microsoft^® Windows^® family of operating systems, Linux^®, NetWare^®, Solaris and UNIX.

Our microprocessors and chipsets are incorporated into computing platforms that also include GPUs and core software. A platform is a collection of technologies that are designed to work together to provide a more complete computing solution. We believe that integrated, balanced platforms consisting of CPUs, GPUs, and chipsets that work together at the system level bring end users improved system stability, increased performance and enhanced power efficiency. Also, by offering our customers an all-AMD platform, we are able to provide them with a single point of contact for the key platform components and enable them to bring the platforms to market faster in a variety of client and server system form factors.

Our AMD Fusion family of APUs represents a new approach to processor design and software development, delivering serial, parallel and visual compute capabilities for HD video, 3D and data-intensive workloads in the APU. APUs combine high-performance serial and parallel processing cores with other special-purpose hardware accelerators. We designed our APUs for improved visual computing, security, performance-per-watt and smaller device form factors. In November 2010, we began shipping the first of our AMD Fusion family of APU processor products. These APUs feature our new x86 CPU core, codenamed “Bobcat,” which is designed specifically for the low-powered and ultra-thin PC markets.

Server.    Our microprocessors for server platforms consist primarily of multi-core AMD Opteron processors. A server is a system that performs services for connected clients as part of a client-server architecture. Servers are designed to run an application or applications, often for extended periods of time with minimal human direction. Examples of servers include web servers, e-mail servers, print servers and cloud computing servers. These servers run a variety of applications including business intelligence, enterprise resource planning, customer relationship management and advanced scientific or engineering models commonly referred to as high performance computing. Cloud computing is a computing model where data, applications and services are delivered over the internet or an intranet. High performance computing involves the use of supercomputers and computer clusters to solve advanced computational problems in disciplines ranging from financial modeling to weather forecasting to oil and gas exploration.

AMD Opteron processors also allow enterprise customers to efficiently implement virtualization across their businesses. Virtualization is the use of software to allow multiple discrete operating systems and application environments (i.e., multiple virtual servers) to share a single physical computer. By enabling multiple operating

4

Table of Contents

systems and applications to run on the same server, virtualization offers the benefit of consolidating workloads and reducing hardware requirements, which can also reduce power, cooling and system management costs.

In March 2010, we launched the AMD Opteron 6000 Series platform, our 8- and 12-core x86 processors for the high volume 2 processor (2P) and value 4 processor (4P) server markets. In June 2010, we launched the AMD Opteron 4000 Series platform designed specifically for the unique needs of cloud and hyperscale data centers.

Notebook.    Consumers continue to demand thinner and lighter notebook platforms with longer battery life. In response to this demand, we continue to invest in designing and developing low power notebook platforms.

Our microprocessors for notebook PC platforms consist of the AMD Dual-Core Accelerated Processor E-350, AMD Dual-Core Accelerated Processor C-50, AMD Phenom™ II Dual-Core Mobile Processor, AMD Phenom II Quad-Core Mobile Processor, AMD Turion™ X2 Mobile Processor, AMD Turion II Mobile Processor, AMD Turion II Ultra Mobile Processor, AMD Turion Neo X2 Mobile Processor, AMD Athlon™ II processor, AMD Athlon Neo processor, AMD Athlon Neo X2 Dual-Core processor and the Mobile AMD Sempron™ processor. We design our mobile processor products for higher performance and longer battery life.

In May 2010, we launched two notebook platforms targeted at the mainstream market and the market for small and thin-and-light notebooks. In January 2011, we launched a low power notebook platform in two APU variations: E-Series and C-Series. Our low powered platform with the E-Series “Zacate” APU is targeted at mainstream notebooks, while our low powered platform with the C-Series “Ontario” APU is targeted at HD netbooks. In January 2011, we also updated our mainstream notebook platform, in order to deliver to users more performance and a better experience when multi-tasking and on entertainment and media applications.

Desktop.    Our microprocessors for desktop PC platforms consist primarily of the following tiered product brands: AMD Phenom II, AMD Phenom, AMD Athlon II, AMD Athlon X2, AMD Athlon and AMD Sempron processors, which are based on AMD64 Technology. Processors marked under these brand names include single-, dual-, triple-, quad- and six- core versions. All AMD desktop microprocessors are based on AMD Direct Connect Architecture. AMD Phenom branded processors are designed for megatasking, or running multiple, multi-threaded applications at the same time. Additionally, our Direct Connect Architecture allows all cores to have optimum access to the integrated memory controller and integrated HyperTransport links, so that performance scales well with the number of cores. We designed the AMD Athlon processors for advanced multitasking on mainstream desktop PCs, and they are currently available with single or dual-core technology. We designed the AMD Athlon dual-core processors for users who run software applications, such as productivity applications, multimedia applications and basic content creation, simultaneously. Our AMD processors are designed to enable an end-user to perform multiple tasks with little or no performance interruption, such as downloading audio files such as MP3s, recording to digital media devices, checking and writing email and editing a digital photo.

In April 2010, we launched new mainstream and enthusiast desktop platforms. These new platforms are enhanced with our latest graphics technology for HD digital media and 3D entertainment and multi-core processors for multi-tasking, including the new six-core AMD Phenom II X6 processor. Consistent with our other AMD Phenom processors, both the AMD Phenom II X6 1055T and 1090T contain AMD’s Turbo CORE technology. AMD Turbo CORE technology is a performance boosting technology that automatically switches from six cores to three turbocharged cores for applications that require speed over multiple cores. While in Turbo CORE mode, the AMD Phenom II X6 processor shifts frequency speed from 3.2GHz on six cores, to 3.6GHz on three cores. In addition, the E-Series 2011 low power platform can be used in all-in-ones and small form factor desktop PCs.

5

Table of Contents

Embedded Processor Products

Our embedded products address customer needs in PC-adjacent markets. Typically, our embedded products are used in applications that require high to moderate levels of performance where key features include low cost, mobility, low power and small form factor. High performance graphics are increasingly important in many embedded systems. Customers of our embedded products include vendors in industrial controls, digital signage, point of sale/self-service kiosks, medical imaging, set-top box and casino gaming machines as well as enterprise class telecommunications, networking, security, storage systems and thin-clients, or computers that serve as an access device on a network.

The embedded market has moved from developing proprietary, custom designs to leveraging the industry-standard x86 instruction set architecture as a way to reduce costs and speed time to market. Customer requirements for these systems include: very low power for small enclosures and 24x7 operation, support for Linux, Windows and other operating systems, and high-performance for increasingly sophisticated applications. Other requirements include advanced specifications for industrial temperatures, shock and vibration, and reliability.

Our embedded platforms include options from the AMD Opteron, AMD Athlon, AMD Turion, and AMD Sempron processor families; the AMD Embedded G-Series, which is the embedded version of our APUs; the AMD Radeon™ graphics processor family; and numerous AMD chipsets. These products are part of the AMD Longevity Program, which provides for an availability period of up to five years in some cases in order to support lengthy development and qualification cycles and long-term life of the system in the market.

In April 2010, we announced two new complete platforms for the embedded market, the compact ASB2 platform and the high-performance AM3 platform with improved graphics performance and I/O features. Our embedded platforms consist of chipset and graphics solutions along with high-performance CPUs. In January 2011, we launched the AMD Embedded G-Series platform. Based on AMD Fusion technology, the new G-Series delivers a full-featured embedded platform and is designed to help reduce power consumption, physical footprint of the components and the costs to design and produce highly-integrated embedded solutions.

Chipset Market and Products

Chipsets send data between the microprocessor and input, display and storage devices, such as the keyboard, mouse, monitor, hard drive and CD or DVD drive. Chipsets perform essential logic functions, such as balancing the performance of the system and removing bottlenecks. Chipsets also extend the graphics, audio, video and other capabilities of computer systems. All desktop, notebook and server PCs incorporate a chipset. In many PCs, the chipset is integrated with additional functions such as a GPU. An integrated chipset solution is commonly known as an IGP (integrated graphics processor) chipset. Chipsets that do not integrate a graphics core will be connected to what is known as a discrete GPU. IGP chipsets offer a lower cost solution and in some circumstances can offer reduced power consumption or smaller system form factors. A majority of PCs make use of IGP chipsets, while discrete GPUs are used in higher performance PCs and servers.

In November 2010, we began shipping the first of our AMD Fusion family of APU processor products. The APU architecture replaces an IGP-type chipset with an AMD Fusion Controller Hub chip which performs the input and output functions of the chipset. We believe that the combination of an APU and the AMD Fusion Controller Hub will eventually replace our market for IGP chipsets. We expect that our portfolio of products will continue to include discrete GPUs as we continue to introduce high performance CPUs in 2011.

6

Table of Contents

Graphics Products

Graphics Market

The primary product of a semiconductor graphics supplier is the GPU. The GPU is specifically architected for high performance graphics processing, unlike the CPU. In this way, a dedicated GPU and CPU work in tandem to increase overall speed and performance of the system. A graphics solution can be in the form of either a discrete GPU, an integrated chipset, or an embedded graphics processor solution. The semiconductor graphics market addresses the need for visual or parallel processing in various computing and entertainment platforms such as desktop PCs, notebook PCs and workstations. Users of these products value a rich visual experience, particularly in the high-end enthusiast market where consumers often seek out the fastest and highest performing visual processing products to enable the most compelling and immersive gaming experiences. Moreover, for many consumers, the PC is evolving from a traditional data and communications processing machine to an entertainment platform. Visual realism and graphical display capabilities are key elements of product differentiation among various product platforms. This has led to the increasing creation and use of processing intensive multimedia content for PCs and to PC manufacturers designing PCs for playing games, displaying photos and capturing TV and other multimedia content, viewing online videos, photo editing and managing digital content. In turn, the trend has contributed to the development of higher performance graphics solutions.

Graphics Products

Our customers generally use our graphics solutions to increase the speed of rendering images and to improve image resolution and color definition. Our products include 3D graphics and video and multimedia products developed for use in desktop and notebook PCs, including home media PCs, professional workstations and servers. With each of our graphics products, we provide drivers and supporting software packages that enable the effective use of these products under a variety of operating systems and applications. Our latest generation of graphics products and related software offer full support for the Microsoft^® Windows^® 7 and Microsoft^® Windows^® Vista operating systems. In addition, our graphics products support Apple’s Mac OS X, as well as Linux^® -based applications.

Heavy computational workloads have traditionally been processed on a CPU, but we believe that the industry is shifting to a new computing paradigm that relies more on the GPU or a combination of GPU and CPU. AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing or GPGPU (General Purpose GPU) refers to a set of advanced hardware and software technologies that enable AMD GPUs, working in concert with the computer system’s CPUs, to accelerate applications beyond traditional graphics and video processing by allowing the CPUs and GPUs to process information cooperatively. Heterogeneous computing enables PCs and servers to run computationally-intensive tasks more efficiently, providing a superior application experience to the end user. In addition, our latest generation of graphics products offers full support for the Microsoft DirectX^® 11 (DX 11) and OpenCL application programming interface standards which enable the handling of key multimedia tasks such as gaming programming and video. OpenCL is the widely adopted industry standard for running parallel tasks on CPUs and GPUs using the same code.

We believe that consumers will increasingly utilize graphic intensive applications that will require discrete GPUs. With our APUs, we offer discrete level GPU performance at value and mainstream price points with the added benefit of long battery life in notebook PCs and lower power computing devices. Additionally, a mainstream APU, when paired with an AMD discrete GPU, in multi-GPU configuration will enable greater graphics performance and parallel processing. As the visual experience grows in importance, semiconductor graphics suppliers and software developers are recognizing the potential of leveraging the GPU’s computing capabilities to accelerate certain workloads. As a result, we expect that competitors in the CPU market will continue to deliver products that will require discrete GPUs to meet end user expectations.

Discrete Desktop Graphics.    Although desktop PC manufacturers have tended to rely on IGP chipsets for graphics, we believe that discrete graphic solutions will continue to be the preferred solution across desktop PC

7

Table of Contents

configurations and platforms designed for gaming enthusiasts, computer aided design, or CAD, professionals and animators as well as for multimedia, photo and video editing and other graphic-intensive applications. Our discrete GPUs for desktop PCs include the AMD Radeon HD 6000 series, ATI Radeon HD 5000 series, ATI Radeon HD 4000 series and ATI Radeon HD 3000 series. In February 2010, we introduced the ATI Radeon HD 5830 with full support for DX 11 gaming, AMD Eyefinity technology and AMD Stream capabilities. AMD Eyefinity is a technology that allows a game to be played across multiple screens in a panoramic view with minimal distortion by allowing up to six monitors to be connected to one graphics card. Also in February 2010, we launched the ATI Radeon HD 5570 graphics card, targeting end-users seeking an energy efficient, low-profile DX 11 card for small form factor PCs, and the ATI Radeon HD 5450 graphics card designed to deliver enthusiast HD multimedia and game experience at a value price. In December 2010, we launched the AMD Radeon HD 6900 series graphics processors, providing gaming enthusiasts with AMD’s second-generation DX 11-capable architecture, AMD HD3D technology for 3D entertainment, and AMD Eyefinity multi-display technology.

Discrete Notebook Graphics.    When selecting a graphics solution, key considerations for notebook PC manufacturers are visual performance, power consumption, form factor and cost. Our discrete GPU’s for notebook PCs include: the AMD Radeon HD 6000M series, ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5000 series and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 4000 series. In January 2010, we launched our ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5800 series for gaming enthusiasts, the ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5700 and 5600 series for multimedia performance notebooks, and ATI Mobility Radeon HD 5400 series for value and ultra-thin notebooks. In September 2010, we launched the ATI Radeon HD 5870 and the ATI Radeon HD 5850. The ATI Radeon HD 5800 series of graphics cards is designed to expand PC users’ computing experience with AMD Eyefinity multi-display technology and accelerate their computing experience with AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing. In January 2011, we launched the AMD Radeon HD 6000M series graphics, which feature second generation DX 11-capable architecture, enhanced 3D gaming and Blu-ray 3D video playback capabilities, AMD Eyefinity support and enhanced power management features.

Professional Graphics.    Our AMD FirePro™ family of professional graphics products consist of 3D and 2D multi-view graphics cards and GPUs that we designed for integration in notebook and desktop workstations, as well as business PCs. We designed our AMD FirePro 3D graphics cards for demanding applications such as CAD and digital content creation, with drivers specifically tuned for maximum performance, stability and reliability across a wide range of software packages. Our AMD FirePro 2D Multi-View graphics cards and AMD FireMV 2D workstation cards are designed for financial and corporate environments.

We also provide graphics products for the server market, where we leverage our graphics expertise and align our offerings to provide the stability, video quality and bus architectures desired by our customers. Through our ATI CrossFire^TM Pro, we enable CAD professionals and digital content creators to connect two identical AMD FirePro 3D graphics cards with a flex cable connection that can enhance performance of geometry-limited applications.

FireStream Processors.    We designed our AMD FireStream™ series of products to utilize the parallel stream processing power of the GPU for heavy floating-point computations and to meet the requirements of various industries, such as the high-performance computing and the scientific and financial sectors. In June 2010, we launched the ATI FireStream 9350 and 9370 GPU compute accelerators targeted to handle high performance computing, and cloud and enterprise scale deployments for commercial, scientific and academic research markets.

Game Consoles.    Semiconductor graphics suppliers have leveraged their core visual and graphics processing technologies developed for the PC market by providing graphic solutions to game console manufacturers. In this market, semiconductor graphics suppliers work alongside game console manufacturers to enhance the visual experience for users of sophisticated video games. We leverage our core visual processing technology into the game console market by providing customized GPUs for graphics in videogame consoles such as the Microsoft^® Xbox 360™ and Nintendo Wii.

8

Table of Contents

Marketing and Sales

We sell our products through our direct sales force and through independent distributors and sales representatives in both domestic and international markets pursuant to non-exclusive agreements. Our sales arrangements generally operate on the basis of product forecasts provided by the particular customer, but do not typically include any commitment or requirement for minimum product purchases. We primarily use purchase orders, sales order acknowledgments and contractual agreements as evidence of our sales arrangements. Our agreements typically contain standard terms and conditions covering matters such as payment terms, warranties and indemnities for issues specific to our products.

We generally warrant that our microprocessors, GPUs and chipsets sold to our customers will conform to our approved specifications and be free from defects in material and workmanship under normal use and service for one year. Subject to certain exceptions, we also offer a three-year limited warranty to end users for microprocessor products that are commonly referred to as “processors in a box” and for ATI branded PC workstation products. We have also offered extended limited warranties to certain customers of “tray” microprocessor products and/or workstation graphics products who have written agreements with us and target their computer systems at the commercial and/or embedded markets.

We market and sell our microprocessor and embedded processor products under the AMD trademark. Our desktop PC product brands for microprocessors are AMD Phenom, AMD Athlon and AMD Sempron. Our notebook PC brands for microprocessors are AMD Phenom, AMD Turion, AMD Athlon and AMD Sempron. AMD Athlon processors and AMD Turion processors are sometimes marketed using the “Neo” model designator for low power products targeted at the thin-and-light notebook segment. Our server brand for microprocessors is AMD Opteron. We also sell low-power versions of our AMD Opteron, AMD Athlon, AMD Turion and AMD Sempron processors as embedded processor solutions. We market and sell our chipsets under the AMD trademark.

Prior to October 2010, we marketed and sold GPUs for the consumer and professional markets under the ATI trademark. In October 2010, we transitioned the consumer graphics brand name from ATI Radeon to AMD Radeon for new products. All previously launched products retain the ATI Radeon brand name. In January 2011, we transitioned the brand name from ATI to AMD for new professional graphics products launching in 2011. All previously launched professional graphics products will retain the following brand names: ATI FirePro, ATI FireGL^TM and ATI FireMV.

We launch or update new platforms for consumers in the desktop and notebook markets under our VISION Technology from AMD brand. We launched VISION Technology in late 2009 as a new way to help consumers select the PC that best meets their needs. We designed VISION Technology to simplify the buying process for consumers by more clearly connecting our brand to the level of activities that consumers want to perform on the PC. VISION Technology contains multiple levels of increasingly rich PC system capabilities to address the diverse needs of today’s PC users. In January 2010, we introduced VISION Pro Technology. Designed for business users, VISION Pro Technology extends the approach of VISION Technology to commercial PC platforms. In May 2010, we introduced VISION Black, to enable the highest end capabilities sought by enthusiasts, primarily on desktop PCs.

We market our products through our direct marketing and co-marketing programs. In addition, we have cooperative advertising and marketing programs with customers or third parties, including market development programs, pursuant to which we may provide product information, training, marketing materials and funds. Under our co-marketing development programs, eligible customers can use market development funds as partial reimbursement for advertisements and marketing programs related to our products, subject to meeting defined criteria. Original Equipment Manufacturers, or OEMs, customers may qualify for market development funds based on purchases of eligible products.

9

Table of Contents

Customers

Our microprocessor customers consist primarily of OEMs, original design manufacturers, or ODMs, system builders and independent distributors in both domestic and international markets. ODMs provide design and/or manufacturing services to branded and unbranded private label resellers, OEMs and system builders. Our graphics products customers include the foregoing as well as AIBs, or add-in-board manufacturers.

Customers of our chipset products consist primarily of PC and server OEMs, often through ODMs or other contract manufacturers who build the OEM motherboards, as well as desktop and server motherboard manufacturers who incorporate chipsets into their channel motherboards.

Our sales and marketing teams work closely with our customers to define product features, performance and timing of new products so that the products we are developing meet our customers’ needs. We also employ application engineers to assist our customers in designing, testing and qualifying system designs that incorporate our products in order to assist in optimizing product compatibility. We believe that our commitment to customer service and design support improves our customers’ time-to-market and fosters relationships that encourage customers to use the next generation of our products.

Original Equipment Manufacturers

We focus on three types of OEMs: multi-nationals, selected regional accounts and target market customers. Large multi-nationals and regional accounts are our core OEM customers. Our OEM customers include numerous foreign and domestic manufacturers of servers and workstations, desktop and notebook PCs, and PC motherboards.

In 2010, Hewlett-Packard Company accounted for more than 10% of our consolidated net revenues. Sales to Hewlett-Packard consisted primarily of products from our Computing Solutions segment. Five customers, including Hewlett-Packard, accounted for approximately 55% of the net revenue attributable to our Computing Solutions segment. In addition, five customers accounted for approximately 46% of the net revenue attributable to our Graphics segment. A loss of any of these customers could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Third-Party Distributors

Our authorized distributors resell to sub-distributors and mid-sized and smaller OEMs and ODMs. Typically, distributors handle a wide variety of products, including those that compete with our products. Distributors typically maintain an inventory of our products. In most instances, our agreements with distributors protect their inventory of our products against price reductions and provide return rights with respect to any product that we have removed from our price book that is not more than twelve months older than the manufacturing code date. In addition, some agreements with our distributors may contain standard stock rotation provisions permitting limited levels of product returns.

AIB Manufacturers and System Integrators

We strive to establish and broaden our relationships with AIB manufacturers. We offer component-level graphics and chipset products to AIB manufacturers who in turn build and sell board-level products using our technology to system integrators, or SIs, and at retail. Our agreements with AIBs protect their inventory of our products against price reductions. We also sell directly to our SI customers. SIs typically sell from positions of regional or product-based strength in the market. They usually operate on short design cycles and can respond quickly with new technologies. SIs often use discrete graphics solutions as a means to differentiate their products and add value to their customers.

10

Table of Contents

Competition

Generally, the IC industry is intensely competitive. Products typically compete on product quality, power consumption, reliability, performance, size (or form factor), cost, selling price, adherence to industry standards, software and hardware compatibility and stability, brand recognition, timely product introductions and availability. Technological advances in the industry result in frequent product introductions, regular price reductions, short product life cycles and increased product capabilities that may result in significant performance improvements. Our ability to compete depends on our ability to develop, introduce and sell new products or enhanced versions of existing products on a timely basis and at competitive prices, while reducing our costs.

Competition in the Microprocessor Market

Intel Corporation has dominated the market for microprocessors for many years. Intel’s market share and significant financial resources enable it to market its products aggressively, to target our customers and our channel partners with special incentives, and to discipline customers who do business with us. These aggressive activities have in the past and are likely in the future to result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for our products, and adversely affect our margins and profitability.

As long as Intel remains in this dominant position, we may be materially adversely affected by Intel’s:

Intel exerts substantial influence over computer manufacturers and their channels of distribution through various brand and other marketing programs. As a result of Intel’s dominant position in the microprocessor market, Intel has been able to control x86 microprocessor and computer system standards and benchmarks and to dictate the type of products the microprocessor market requires of us. Intel also dominates the computer system platform, which includes core logic chipsets, graphics chips, motherboards and other components necessary to assemble a computer system. OEMs that purchase microprocessors for computer systems are highly dependent on Intel, less innovative on their own and, to a large extent, are distributors of Intel technology. Additionally, Intel is able to drive de facto standards for x86 microprocessors that could cause us and other companies to have delayed access to such standards.

Intel also leverages its dominance in the microprocessor market to sell its integrated chipsets. Intel manufactures and sells integrated graphics chipsets bundled with their microprocessors and is a dominant competitor with respect to this portion of our business. Moreover, computer manufacturers are increasingly using integrated graphics chipsets rather than discrete graphics components, particularly for notebooks, because they cost less than traditional discrete graphics components while offering satisfactory graphics performance for most mainstream PCs. Intel could also take actions that place our discrete GPUs at a competitive disadvantage, including giving one or more of our competitors in the graphics market, such as Nvidia Corporation (Nvidia), preferential access to its proprietary graphics interface or other useful information.

Intel has substantially greater financial resources than we do and accordingly spends substantially greater amounts on research and development than we do. We expect Intel to maintain its dominant position and to

11

Table of Contents

continue to invest heavily in marketing, research and development, new manufacturing facilities and other technology companies. To the extent Intel manufactures a significantly larger portion of its microprocessor products using more advanced process technologies, or introduces competitive new products into the market before we do, we may be more vulnerable to Intel’s aggressive marketing and pricing strategies for microprocessor products.

Intel’s dominant position in the microprocessor market and integrated graphics chipset market, its existing relationships with top-tier OEMs and its aggressive marketing and pricing strategies could result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Other potential competitors include solution providers of ARM Ltd.’s (ARM) powered products used in the mobile and embedded electronics market as relatively low cost and small microprocessors and also in form factors that offer an alternative to mainstream PCs such as netbooks and tablets. In addition, Nvidia recently announced its plans to build custom CPU cores based on ARM architecture to support future products ranging from PCs and servers to workstations and super computers.

Competition in the Chipset Market

In the chipset market, our competitors include suppliers of integrated graphics chipsets. PC manufacturers are increasingly choosing to use integrated chipsets, particularly for notebooks, because they cost less than traditional discrete GPUs while offering acceptable graphics performance for most mainstream PC users. Intel manufactures and sells integrated graphics chipsets bundled with their microprocessors and is a dominant competitor in this market.

Competition in the Graphics Market

In the graphics market, our competitors include integrated graphics and discrete graphics suppliers. Intel manufactures and sells integrated graphics chipsets bundled with their microprocessors and is a dominant competitor with respect to this portion of our business. Intel could leverage its dominance in the microprocessor market to sell its integrated chipsets. Moreover, computer manufacturers are increasingly using integrated graphics chipsets, particularly for notebooks, because they cost less than traditional discrete GPUs while offering acceptable graphics performance for most mainstream PC users.

Intel could take actions that place our discrete GPUs and integrated chipsets at a competitive disadvantage such as giving one or more of our competitors in the graphics market, such as Nvidia, preferential access to its proprietary graphics interface or other useful information.

Other than Intel, our principal competitor is Nvidia. AMD and Nvidia are the two principal players offering discrete graphics solutions. Other competitors include a number of smaller companies, which may have greater flexibility to address specific market needs, but less financial resources to do so, especially as we believe that the growing complexity of visual processors and the associated research and development costs represent an increasingly higher barrier to entry in this market.

In the game console category, we compete primarily against Nvidia. Other competitors include Intel and IBM.

Research and Development

We focus our research and development activities on improving and enhancing product design. One main area of focus is on delivering the next generation of products with greater system level integration of the CPU and GPU, improved system performance and performance-per-watt characteristics. For example, we are focusing on improving the battery life of our microprocessors and APU products for notebook PCs and the power

12

Table of Contents

efficiency of our microprocessors for servers. We are also focusing on delivering a range of low power integrated platforms to serve key markets, including commercial clients, mobile computing, and gaming and media computing. We believe that these integrated platforms will bring customers better time-to-market and increased performance and energy efficiency. We also work with industry leaders on process technology, software and other functional intellectual property and we work with others in the industry, public foundations, universities and industry consortia to conduct early stage research and development.

Our research and development expenses for 2010, 2009, and 2008 were approximately $1.4 billion, $1.7 billion and $1.8 billion. For more information, see Part II, Item 7—“Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” or MD&A.

We conduct product and system research and development activities for our products in the United States with additional design and development engineering teams located in Canada, India, Germany, United Kingdom, Singapore, China, Japan, and Taiwan.

Manufacturing Arrangements and Assembly and Test Facilities

Third-Party Foundry Facilities

GLOBALFOUNDRIES, Inc. On March 2, 2009, together with Advanced Technology Investment Company LLC (ATIC) and West Coast Hitech L.P., (WCH), acting through its general partner, West Coast Hitech G.P., Ltd., we formed GLOBALFOUNDRIES, Inc. (GF), a manufacturing joint venture that manufactures semiconductor products and provides certain foundry services to us. Pursuant to the Master Transaction Agreement entered into among the parties on October 6, 2008, as amended, we contributed certain manufacturing -related assets and liabilities to GF in exchange for securities of GF and the assumption of specified AMD liabilities by GF. At the closing of the transactions, we also entered into a Shareholders’ Agreement (the Shareholders’ Agreement), a Funding Agreement (the Funding Agreement), and a Wafer Supply Agreement (the Wafer Supply Agreement), with ATIC and GF, certain terms of each of which are summarized below.

Shareholders’ Agreement.    The Shareholders’ Agreement sets forth the rights and obligations of AMD and ATIC as shareholders of GF. The number of directors a GF shareholder may designate is determined according to the percentage of GF shares it owns on a fully converted to GF Ordinary Shares basis. We currently have the right to designate one director. Pursuant to the Shareholders’ Agreement, if a change of control of AMD occurs within two years of the closing of the transactions, or March 2, 2011, ATIC will have the right to put any or all GF securities (valued at their fair market value) held by ATIC and its permitted transferees to us in exchange for cash. In addition, in the event of a change of control of AMD, ATIC will have the option to purchase in cash any or all GF securities (valued at their fair market value) held by us and our permitted transferees, ATIC can require us or the other party to the change in control transaction to assume a pro-rata portion of ATIC’s funding commitment under the Funding Agreement until 2013, and ATIC can require the other party to the change in control transaction to guarantee all of our obligations under the transaction documents.

Funding Agreement.    The Funding Agreement provides for the future funding of GF and governs the terms and conditions under which ATIC is obligated to provide such funding. Pursuant to the Funding Agreement, ATIC committed to additional equity funding of a minimum of $3.6 billion and up to $6.0 billion to be provided in phases over a five-year period commencing from the closing of the transactions. We have the right, but not the obligation, to provide additional future capital to GF in an amount pro rata to our interest in the fully converted Ordinary Shares of GF. To the extent we choose not to participate in an equity financing of GF, ATIC is obligated to purchase our share of GF securities, subject to ATIC’s funding commitments under the Funding Agreement. ATIC’s obligations to provide funding are subject to certain conditions.

On December 27, 2010, ATIC International Investment Company LLC, an affiliate of ATIC, contributed all of the outstanding Ordinary Shares of GLOBALFOUNDRIES Singapore Pte. Ltd., (formerly Chartered

13

Table of Contents

Semiconductor Manufacturing Ltd.) (GFS), to GF. As a result, we amended and restated the Shareholders’ Agreement and the Funding Agreement. Subject to certain exceptions set forth in the Amended and Restated Shareholders’ Agreement, our right to designate one representative to the GF board of directors will continue for at least two years following the date on which our ownership in GF, on a fully converted to GF Ordinary Shares basis, falls below 10%, the point at which we previously lost the right to such board representative. Pursuant to the Amended and Restated Funding Agreement, for each equity funding under the Funding Agreement on or after November 17, 2010, the securities issued in consideration thereof will consist solely of GF’s Class A Preferred Shares. In addition, the purchase price per Class A Preferred Share is determined by dividing GF’s net tangible assets (derived from its most recent fiscal year-end audited consolidated balance sheet) by GF’s total number of outstanding preferred shares (assuming the conversion of any outstanding GF Class A subordinated convertible notes into Class A Preferred Shares and Class B subordinated convertible notes into Class B Preferred Shares) as of the date of the balance sheet referred to above and multiplying by 1.10. Prior to November 17, 2010, the funding multiple was 0.90.

Wafer Supply Agreement.    We purchase substantially all of our microprocessor product requirements from GF pursuant to the terms of the Wafer Supply Agreement. We currently pay GF for wafers on a cost-plus basis. If we acquire a third-party business that manufactures microprocessor products, we will have up to two years to transition the manufacture of such products to GF. In addition, once GF develops certain specific qualified processes for bulk silicon wafers, we will purchase from GF, where competitive, specified percentages of our GPU wafer requirements. We agreed not to sell, transfer or dispose of all or substantially all of our assets related to GPU products and related technology to any third party without GF’s consent, unless the transferee agrees to be bound by the terms of the Wafer Supply Agreement, including its minimum purchase obligations, where competitive, with respect to GPU products. We will provide GF with binding product forecasts of our product requirements. After reviewing forecasts provided by us, as agreed by the parties, GF will allocate capacity sufficient to produce our microprocessor product volumes as set forth in the binding forecasts. At our request, GF will also provide sort services to us on a product-by-product basis. The price for GPU products will be determined by the parties when GF is able to begin manufacturing GPU products for us.

The Wafer Supply Agreement terminates no later than March 2, 2024. However, the Wafer Supply Agreement may be terminated if a business plan deadlock occurs because AMD or ATIC, as the shareholders of GF, are unable to agree on GF’s annual business plan and ATIC elects to enter into a transition period pursuant to the Funding Agreement. GF agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to assist us to transition the supply of products to another provider and continue to fulfill purchase orders for up to two years following the termination or expiration of the Wafer Supply Agreement. During the transition period, pricing for microprocessor products will remain as set forth in the Wafer Supply Agreement, but our purchase commitments to GF will no longer apply.

GF fabricates wafers for our microprocessors at its facilities primarily on 45nm process technology. In addition, we are in the process of qualifying GF’s 32nm process technology for our products.

We also have foundry arrangements with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC) for the production of our graphics and chipset products, embedded processors, as well as two of our APU products. Currently, we are in production in TSMC’s 300 millimeter and 200 millimeter fabrication facilities in technologies ranging from 40nm to 250nm. We are currently in the process of qualifying 28nm process technology at multiple foundries for certain products. Smaller process geometries can lead to gains in graphics processing performance, lower power consumption and lower per unit manufacturing costs.

Other Third-Party Manufacturers

We outsource board-level graphics product manufacturing to third-party manufacturers. These include Foxconn and PC Partner with locations in China. Our facility in Markham, Ontario, Canada is primarily devoted to prototyping for new graphics product introductions.

14

Table of Contents

Assembly, Test, Mark and Packaging Facilities

We own and operate three microprocessor assembly, test, mark and packaging facilities. Wafers for our microprocessor and embedded processor products are delivered from third party foundries, to our assembly, test, mark and packaging facilities. Our microprocessor assembly, test, mark and packaging facilities are described in the chart set forth below:

Wafers for our graphics products are delivered from the third party foundry to our test, assembly and packaging partners, which include Advanced Semiconductor Engineering Group, Amkor, King Yuan Electronics, Siliconware Precision Industries and STATS-ChipPAC Limited, who package and test the final semiconductor products.

Intellectual Property and Licensing

We rely on contracts and intellectual property rights to protect our products and technologies from unauthorized third-party copying and use. Intellectual property rights include copyrights, patents, patent applications, trademarks, trade secrets and maskwork rights. As of December 25, 2010 we had more than 4,100 patents in the United States and approximately 1,300 patent applications pending in the United States. In certain cases, we have filed corresponding applications in foreign jurisdictions. We expect to file future patent applications in both the United States and abroad on significant inventions, as we deem appropriate. We do not believe that any individual patent, or the expiration thereof, is or would be material to our business.

As is typical in the semiconductor industry, we have numerous cross-licensing and technology exchange agreements with other companies under which we both transfer and receive technology and intellectual property rights. One such agreement is the cross-license agreement that we entered into with Intel on November 11, 2009, in connection with the settlement of our litigation. Under the cross license agreement, Intel has granted to us and our subsidiaries, and we have granted Intel and its subsidiaries, non-exclusive, royalty-free licenses to all patents that are either owned or controlled by the parties at any time that have a first effective filing date or priority date prior to the five-year anniversary of the effective date of the cross license agreement, referred to as the “Capture Period,” to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise dispose of certain semiconductor- and electronic-related products anywhere in the world. Under the cross license agreement, Intel has rights to make semiconductor products for third parties, but the third party product designs are not licensed as a result of such manufacture. We have rights to perform assembly and testing for third parties but not rights to make semiconductor products for third parties. The term of the cross license agreement continues until the expiration of the last to expire of the licensed patents, unless earlier terminated. A party can terminate the cross license agreement or the rights and licenses of the other party if the other party materially breaches the cross license agreement and does not correct the noticed material breach within 60 days. Upon such termination, the terminated party’s license rights terminate but the terminating party’s license rights continue, subject to that party’s continued compliance with the terms of the cross license agreement. The cross license agreement and the Capture Period will automatically terminate if a party undergoes a change of control (as defined in the cross license agreement) and both parties’ licenses will terminate. Upon the bankruptcy of a party, that party may assume, but may not assign, the cross license agreement, and in the event that the cross license agreement cannot be assumed, the cross license agreement and the licenses granted will terminate.

15

Table of Contents

We also have a patent cross license agreement with GF pursuant to which each party granted to the other a non-exclusive license under patents filed by a party (or are otherwise acquired by a party) within a certain number of years following the effective date of the agreement. In 2009, under the agreements with GF, we assigned approximately 3,000 patents and approximately 1,000 patent applications to GF. GF owns its allocation of patents and applications subject to pre-existing rights, licenses or immunities granted to third parties relating to such patents and applications. The patents and patent applications to be owned by each party after the division were licensed to the other party pursuant to the agreement.

In addition, we entered into a Non-Patent Intellectual Property and Technology Transfer Agreement with GF pursuant to which we assigned to GF all of our right, title and interest in technology and non-patent intellectual property rights used exclusively in the manufacture, sorting and/or intermediate testing of semiconductor products. We retained technology and non-patent intellectual property rights used exclusively in the design and/or post-fabrication delivery testing of semiconductors. Technology and non-patent intellectual property rights used both in the manufacture, sorting and/or intermediate testing of semiconductor products and in the design and/or post-fabrication delivery testing of semiconductor products is owned jointly by us and GF.

Backlog

We sell standard lines of products. Sales are made primarily pursuant to purchase orders for current delivery or agreements covering purchases over a period of time. Some of these orders or agreements may be revised or cancelled without penalty. Generally, in light of current industry practice, we do not believe that such orders or agreements provide meaningful backlog figures or are necessarily indicative of actual sales for any succeeding period.

Employees

As of December 25, 2010, we had approximately 11,100 employees.

Environmental Regulations

Many aspects of our business operations and products are regulated by domestic and international environmental laws and regulations. These regulations include limitations on discharge of pollutants to air, water, and soil; remediation requirements; product chemical content limitations; manufacturing chemical use and handling restrictions; pollution control requirements; waste minimization considerations; and requirements with respect to treatment, transport, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes. If we fail to comply with any of the applicable environmental regulations we may be subject to fines, suspension of production, alteration of our manufacturing processes, import/export restrictions, sales limitations, and/or criminal and civil liabilities. Existing or future regulations could require us to procure expensive pollution abatement or remediation equipment; to modify product designs; or to incur other expenses to comply with environmental regulations. Any failure to adequately control the use, disposal or storage, or discharge of hazardous substances could expose us to future liabilities that could have a material adverse effect on our business. We believe we are in material compliance with applicable environmental requirements and do not expect those requirements to result in material expenditures in the foreseeable future.

Environmental laws are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent over time. For example, the European Union (EU) and China are two among a growing number of jurisdictions that have enacted in recent years restrictions on the use of lead, among other chemicals, in electronic products with other countries considering similar restrictions. These regulations affect semiconductor packaging. There is a risk that the cost, quality and manufacturing yields of lead-free products may be less favorable compared to lead-based products or that the transition to lead-free products may produce sudden changes in demand, which may result in excess inventory. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains provisions to improve the transparency and accountability concerning the supply of minerals coming from the conflict zones of

16

Table of Contents

the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). As a result, the SEC is required to promulgate by April 15, 2011, new annual disclosure and reporting requirements for those companies who use “conflict” minerals mined from the DRC and adjoining countries in their products. The implementation of these requirements could affect the sourcing and availability of minerals used in the manufacture of semiconductor devices. As a result, there may only be a limited pool of suppliers who provide conflict free metals, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain products in sufficient quantities or at competitive prices. Also, since our supply chain is complex, we may face reputational challenges with our customers and other stakeholders if we are unable to sufficiently verify the origins for all metals used in our products through the due diligence procedures that we implement.

Other regulatory requirements potentially affecting our back-end manufacturing processes and the design and marketing of our products are in development throughout the world. In addition, a number of jurisdictions including the EU, Australia and China are considering market entry requirements for computers based on the ENERGY STAR specification (Version 5.0) as well as additional limits. The proposed requirements, which have not yet been finalized, could potentially be approved and implemented as early as the fourth quarter of 2011. If such requirements are implemented in the proposed time frame and to the proposed specification there is the potential for certain of our microprocessor, chipset and GPU products, as incorporated in desktop and mobile PCs, being excluded from these markets. We have management systems in place to identify and ensure compliance with such requirements and have budgeted for foreseeable associated expenditures. However, we cannot assure you that future environmental legal requirements will not become more stringent or costly in the future. Therefore, we cannot assure you that our costs of complying with current and future environmental and health and safety laws, and our liabilities arising from past and future releases of, or exposure to, hazardous substances will not have a material adverse effect on us.

The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. If any of the following risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be materially adversely affected. In addition, you should consider the interrelationship and compounding effects of two or more risks occurring simultaneously.

Intel Corporation’s dominance of the microprocessor market and its aggressive business practices may limit our ability to compete effectively.

Intel Corporation has dominated the market for microprocessors for many years. Intel’s market share, margins and significant financial resources enable it to market its products aggressively, to target our customers and our channel partners with special incentives, and to discipline customers who do business with us. These aggressive activities have in the past and are likely in the future to result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for our products and adversely affect our margins and profitability.

As long as Intel remains in this dominant position, we may be materially adversely affected by Intel’s:

17

Table of Contents

Intel exerts substantial influence over computer manufacturers and their channels of distribution through various brand and other marketing programs. As a result of Intel’s dominant position in the microprocessor market, Intel has been able to control x86 microprocessor and computer system standards and benchmarks and to dictate the type of products the microprocessor market requires of us. Intel also dominates the computer system platform, which includes core logic chipsets, graphics chips, motherboards and other components necessary to assemble a computer system. OEMs that purchase microprocessors for computer systems are highly dependent on Intel, less innovative on their own and, to a large extent, are distributors of Intel technology. Additionally, Intel is able to drive de facto standards for x86 microprocessors that could cause us and other companies to have delayed access to such standards.

Intel also leverages its dominance in the microprocessor market to sell its integrated chipsets. Intel manufactures and sells integrated graphics chipsets bundled with their microprocessors and is a dominant competitor with respect to this portion of our business. Moreover, computer manufacturers are increasingly using integrated graphics chipsets rather than discrete graphics components, particularly for notebooks, because they cost less than traditional discrete graphics components while offering satisfactory graphics performance for most mainstream PCs. Intel could also take actions that place our discrete GPUs at a competitive disadvantage, including giving one or more of our competitors in the graphics market, such as Nvidia Corporation, preferential access to its proprietary graphics interface or other useful information.

Intel has substantially greater financial resources than we do and accordingly spends substantially greater amounts on research and development than we do. We expect Intel to maintain its dominant position and to continue to invest heavily in marketing, research and development, new manufacturing facilities and other technology companies. To the extent Intel manufactures a significantly larger portion of its microprocessor products using more advanced process technologies, or introduces competitive new products into the market before we do, we may be more vulnerable to Intel’s aggressive marketing and pricing strategies for microprocessor products.

Intel’s dominant position in the microprocessor market and integrated graphics chipset market, its existing relationships with top-tier OEMs and its aggressive marketing and pricing strategies could result in lower unit sales and a lower average selling price for our products, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

The success of our business is dependent upon our ability to introduce products on a timely basis with required features and performance levels that provide value to our customers and support and coincide with significant industry transitions.

Our success depends to a significant extent on the development, qualification, implementation and acceptance of new product designs and improvements that provide value to our customers. Our ability to develop and qualify new products and related technologies to meet evolving industry requirements, at prices acceptable to our customers and on a timely basis are significant factors in determining our competitiveness in our target markets. For example, we expect our customers to ship computer systems with our AMD Fusion accelerated APU codenamed “Llano,” in the second quarter of 2011. If we fail to or are delayed in developing or qualifying new products or technologies, we may lose competitive positioning, which could cause us to lose market share and require us to discount the selling prices of our products.

Delays in developing or qualifying new products can also cause us to miss our customers’ product design windows. If our customers do not include our products in the initial design of their computer systems, they will typically not use our products in their systems until at least the next design configuration. The process of being qualified for inclusion in a customer’s system can be lengthy and could cause us to further miss a cycle in the demand of end-users, which also could result in a loss of market share and harm our business.

Moreover, market demand requires that products incorporate new features and performance standards on an industry-wide basis. Over the life of a specific product, the average selling price undergoes regular price

18

Table of Contents

reductions. The introduction of new products and enhancements to existing products is necessary to maintain an overall corporate average selling price. If we are unable to introduce new products with sufficient increases in average selling price or increased unit sales volumes capable of offsetting the reductions in the average selling price of existing products, our business could be materially adversely affected.

We rely on third parties to manufacture our products, and if they are unable to manufacture our products on a timely basis in sufficient quantities and using competitive technologies, our business could be materially adversely affected.

We rely on third party wafer foundries to fabricate the silicon wafers for all of our products. We also rely on third party providers to assemble, test, mark and pack certain of our products. It is important to have reliable relationships with all of these third party manufacturing suppliers to ensure adequate product supply to respond to customer demand.

If we transition the production of some of our products to new manufacturers, we may experience delayed product introductions, lower yields or poorer performance of our products. If we experience problems with product quality or are unable to secure sufficient capacity from a particular third party manufacturing supplier, or if we for other reasons cease utilizing one of those suppliers, we may be unable to secure an alternative supply for any specific product in a short time frame. We could experience significant delays in the shipment of our products if we are required to find alternative third party manufacturing suppliers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Moreover, if any of our third party manufacturing suppliers suffer any damage to facilities, lose benefits under material agreements, experience power outages, lack sufficient capacity to manufacture our products, encounter financial difficulties or suffer any other disruption or reduction in efficiency, we may encounter supply delays or disruptions. Macroeconomic challenges, such as those that recently affected the global economy, may impact our key suppliers who may reduce their output or become insolvent. Any of these situations could materially adversely impact our business.

Additionally, we do not have long-term commitment contracts with some of our third party manufacturing suppliers. We obtain these manufacturing services on a purchase order basis and these manufacturers are not required to provide us with any specified minimum quantity of product. Accordingly, we depend on these suppliers to allocate to us a portion of their manufacturing capacity sufficient to meet our needs, to produce products of acceptable quality and at acceptable manufacturing yields and to deliver those products to us on a timely basis at acceptable prices. We cannot assure you that these manufacturers will be able to meet our near-term or long-term manufacturing requirements. For example, we experienced constrained wafer foundry capacity for our graphics products that we introduced in the second half of 2009 and the first half of 2010. If we experience supply constraints, we may be required to allocate these products amongst our customers. Some of the manufacturers we use also fabricate wafers and assemble, test and package products for other companies, including certain of our competitors. They could choose to prioritize capacity for other users, increase the prices that they charge us on short notice or reduce or eliminate deliveries to us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Other risks associated with our dependence on third-party manufacturers, include limited control over delivery schedules and quality assurance, lack of capacity in periods of excess demand, misappropriation of our intellectual property, dependence on several small undercapitalized subcontractors, and limited ability to manage inventory and parts. If we are unable to secure sufficient or reliable supplies of products, our ability to meet customer demand may be adversely affected and this could materially affect our business.

19

Table of Contents

If we do not fully utilize GF’s manufacturing facilities or do not otherwise realize the anticipated benefits of our relationship with GF, our business could be adversely impacted.

Although we anticipate realizing certain benefits to our business from our relationship with GF, including a more variable cost model and the ability to take advantage of the shift by integrated device manufacturers to a fabless business model, we cannot assure you that our relationship with GF and ATIC will result in the full realization of these or any other benefits.

Pursuant to the Wafer Supply Agreement between us and GF, we compensate GF on a cost plus-basis to manufacture the silicon wafers for our microprocessor and future APU products, which can result in increased per unit manufacturing costs for AMD compared to manufacturing wafers in-house and may have a negative impact on our reported gross margins. If GF fails to operate at a competitive cost level, our business could be materially adversely affected. In addition, our contractual commitments to GF under the Wafer Supply Agreement require us to use GF’s manufacturing facilities for our microprocessor products. In January 2010, GF announced that it is integrating operations with GFS and in December 2010, GF and GFS legally merged. As a result, GF significantly expanded its customer base to over 150 customers. Although GF manufacturing capacity also increased, the integration process and the increased customer base could lead to delays or disruptions in manufacturing our products, which could materially adversely impact our business.

In addition, the under-utilization of GF manufacturing facilities may increase our per unit costs. It is difficult to predict future growth or decline in the demand for our products, making it difficult to forecast our requirements accurately. If our target markets do not grow, we may under-utilize GF manufacturing facilities. Because of our commitments to GF, during periods in which we under-utilize GF manufacturing facilities as a result of reduced demand for our products, we may not be able to reduce our costs in proportion to the reduced revenues for such a period. If this occurs, our operating results will be materially adversely affected.

Failure to achieve expected manufacturing yields for our products could negatively impact our financial results.

Semiconductor manufacturing yields are a result of both product design and process technology, which is typically proprietary to the manufacturer, and low yields can result from either design or process technology failures. Our third-party foundries are responsible for the process technologies used to fabricate silicon wafers. We cannot be certain that our third-party foundries will be able to develop, obtain or successfully implement leading-edge process technologies needed to manufacture future generations of our products profitably or on a timely basis or that our competitors will not develop new technologies, products or processes earlier. During periods when foundries are implementing new process technologies, their manufacturing facilities may not be fully productive. A substantial delay in the technology transitions to smaller process technologies could have a material adverse effect on us, particularly if our competitors transition to more cost effective technologies before us. For example, GF will manufacture certain of our APUs using 32nm process technology. GF has experienced delays in transitioning to 32nm process technology, which has delayed the introduction of certain APU products. If GF continues to experience delays or difficulties transitioning to 32nm or other advanced process technologies, our business would be materially adversely affected. Moreover, if GF continues to experience manufacturing inefficiencies or other third-party foundries experience manufacturing inefficiencies, we may fail to achieve acceptable yields or experience product delivery delays. Any decrease in manufacturing yields could result in an increase in per unit costs, which would adversely impact our gross margin and/or force us to allocate our reduced product supply amongst our customers, which could harm our relationships with our customers and reputation and materially adversely affect our business.

Global economic uncertainty may adversely impact our business and operating results.

Uncertain global economic conditions have and may in the future adversely impact our business. During challenging economic times, our current or potential future customers may experience cash flow problems and as a result may modify, delay or cancel plans to purchase our products. Additionally, if our customers are not

20

Table of Contents

successful in generating sufficient revenue or are unable to secure financing, they may not be able to pay, or may delay payment of, accounts receivable that they owe us. Any inability of our current or potential future customers to pay us for our products may adversely affect our earnings and cash flow. Moreover, our key suppliers may reduce their output or become insolvent, thereby adversely impacting our ability to manufacture our products. In addition, uncertain economic conditions may make it more difficult for us to raise funds through borrowings or private or public sales of debt or equity securities.

Our ability to design and introduce new products in a timely manner is dependent upon third-party intellectual property.

In the design and development of new products and product enhancements, we rely on third-party intellectual property such as software development tools and hardware testing tools. The design requirements necessary to meet consumer demands for more features and greater functionality from semiconductor products in the future may exceed the capabilities of the third-party development tools available to us. If the third-party intellectual property that we use becomes unavailable or fails to produce designs that meet consumer demands, our business could be materially adversely affected.

We depend on third-party companies for the design, manufacture and supply of motherboards, BIOS software and other computer platform components to support our microprocessor business.

We depend on third-party companies for the design, manufacture and supply of motherboards, BIOS software and other components that our customers utilize in support our microprocessor offerings. Our microprocessors are not designed to function with motherboards and chipsets designed to work with Intel microprocessors. If the designers, manufacturers and suppliers of motherboards and other components decrease their support for our product offerings, our business could be materially adversely affected.

If we lose Microsoft Corporation’s support for our products or other software vendors do not design and develop software to run on our products, our ability to sell our products could be materially adversely affected.

Our ability to innovate beyond the x86 instruction set controlled by Intel depends partially on Microsoft designing and developing its operating systems to run on or support our microprocessor products. Similarly, the success of our products in the market, such as our AMD Fusion products, is dependent on independent software providers designing and developing software to run on our products. If Microsoft does not continue to design and develop its operating systems so that they work with our x86 instruction sets, independent software providers may forego designing their software applications to take advantage of our innovations and customers may not purchase PCs with our microprocessors. In addition, software drivers sold with our products are certified by Microsoft. If Microsoft did not certify a driver, or if we otherwise fail to retain the support of Microsoft or other software vendors, our ability to market our products would be materially adversely affected.

The loss of a significant customer may have a material adverse effect on us.

Collectively, our top five customers accounted for approximately 49% of our net revenue in 2010. On a segment basis, during 2010 five customers accounted for approximately 55% of the net revenue of our Computing Solutions segment and five customers accounted for approximately 46% of the net revenue of our Graphics segment. We expect that a small number of customers will continue to account for a substantial part of revenues of our microprocessor and graphics businesses in the future. If one of our top microprocessor or graphics business customers decided to stop buying our products, or if one of these customers were to materially reduce its operations or its demand for our products, our business would be materially adversely affected.

21

Table of Contents

We are currently conducting a search for a chief executive officer, and our inability to attract and retain qualified personnel may hinder our business.

We are currently conducting a search for a chief executive officer. The transition to a chief executive officer may be disruptive to our operations and create uncertainty about our business and future direction. Until a chief executive officer is identified, it may be more difficult for us to hire and retain other key personnel. Much of our future success depends upon the continued service of numerous qualified engineering, marketing, sales and executive personnel. If we are unable to successfully hire a chief executive officer or to continue to attract, train, and retain qualified personnel, the progress of our product development programs could be hindered, and we could be materially adversely affected. Even if we are able to hire and retain a qualified chief executive officer in a timely manner, we may continue to experience operational inefficiencies and disruptions during the transition period and our business may be materially adversely affected.

If we cannot generate sufficient revenues and operating cash flow or obtain external financing, we may face a cash shortfall and be unable to make all of our planned investments in research and development.

Although we make substantial investments in research and development, we cannot be certain that we will be able to develop, obtain or successfully implement new products and technologies on a timely basis. Our ability to fund research and development expenditures depends on generating sufficient cash flow from operations and the availability of external financing, if necessary. Our research and development expenditures, together with ongoing operating expenses, will be a substantial drain on our cash flow and may decrease our cash balances. If new competitors, technological advances by existing competitors or other competitive factors require us to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in our research and development efforts, our operating expenses would increase. If we are required to invest significantly greater resources than anticipated in research and development efforts without an increase in revenue, our operating results could decline.

We regularly assess markets for external financing opportunities, including debt and equity financing. Additional debt or equity financing may not be available when needed or, if available, may not be available on satisfactory terms. The health of the credit markets may adversely impact our ability to obtain financing when needed. In addition, any downgrades from credit rating agencies such as Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s may adversely impact our ability to obtain external financing or the terms of such financing. Credit agency downgrades may also impact relationships with our suppliers, who may limit our credit lines. Our inability to obtain needed financing or to generate sufficient cash from operations may require us to abandon projects or curtail planned investments in research and development. If we curtail planned investments in research and development or abandon projects, our products may fail to remain competitive and our business would be materially adversely affected.

We have a substantial amount of indebtedness which could adversely affect our financial position and prevent us from implementing our strategy or fulfilling our contractual obligations.

Our debt and capital lease obligations as of December 25, 2010 were $2.4 billion, which reflects the debt discount adjustment on our 6.00% Notes and 8.125% Notes. This amount also includes approximately $229 million related to our accounts receivable financing arrangement with the IBM Parties, which is not a cash obligation.

Our substantial indebtedness may:

22

Table of Contents

We may not be able to generate sufficient cash to service our debt obligations.

Our ability to make payments on and to refinance our debt will depend on our financial and operating performance, which may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter, and is subject to prevailing economic conditions and financial, business and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will be able to generate sufficient cash flow or that we will be able to borrow funds in amounts sufficient to enable us to service our debt or to meet our working capital requirements. If we are not able to generate sufficient cash flow from operations or to borrow sufficient funds to service our debt, we may be required to sell assets or equity, reduce expenditures, refinance all or a portion of our existing debt or obtain additional financing. We cannot assure you that we will be able to refinance our debt, sell assets or equity or borrow more funds on terms acceptable to us, if at all.

Our debt instruments impose restrictions on us that may adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

The indentures governing our 8.125% Notes and 7.75% Notes contain various covenants which limit our ability to:

In addition, the guarantee agreement related to the euro 700 Million Term Loan Facility that we transferred to GF contains restrictive covenants that require us to maintain specified financial ratios when group consolidated cash is below specified amounts. Our ability to satisfy these financial ratios and tests can be affected by events beyond our control. We cannot assure you that we will meet those requirements. A breach of any of these financial ratios or tests could result in a default under the term loan facility, which could cause the lenders to exercise their rights under the guarantee agreement.

The agreements governing our borrowing arrangements contain cross-default provisions whereby a default under one agreement would likely result in cross defaults under agreements covering other borrowings. For example, the occurrence of a default with respect to any indebtedness or any failure to repay debt when due in an amount in excess of $50 million would cause a cross default under the indentures governing our 7.75% Notes, 8.125% Notes, 5.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes. The occurrence of a default under any of these borrowing arrangements would permit the applicable note holders to declare all amounts outstanding under those borrowing arrangements to be immediately due and payable. If the note holders or the trustee under the indentures governing our 7.75% Notes, 8.125% Notes, 5.75% Notes or 6.00% Notes accelerate the repayment of borrowings, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient assets to repay those borrowings and our other indebtedness.

23

Table of Contents

In the event of a change of control, we may not be able to repurchase our outstanding debt as required by the applicable indentures, which would result in a default under the indentures.

Upon a change of control, we will be required to offer to repurchase all of the 7.75% Notes and 8.125% Notes then outstanding at 101% of the principal amount thereof, plus accrued and unpaid interest, if any, up to, but excluding, the repurchase date. Moreover, the indentures governing our 5.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes require us to offer to repurchase these securities upon certain change of control events. As of December 25, 2010, the aggregate outstanding principal amount of the outstanding 8.125% Notes, 5.75% Notes, 7.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes was $2.3 billion. Future debt agreements may contain similar provisions. We may not have the financial resources to repurchase our indebtedness.

The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical and has experienced severe downturns that materially adversely affected, and may in the future materially adversely affect, our business.

The semiconductor industry is highly cyclical and has experienced significant downturns, often in conjunction with constant and rapid technological change, wide fluctuations in supply and demand, continuous new product introductions, price erosion and declines in general economic conditions. We have incurred substantial losses in recent downturns, due to:

Global economic uncertainty and weakness have also impacted the semiconductor market as consumers and businesses have deferred purchases, which negatively impacted demand for our products. Our financial performance has been, and may in the future be, negatively affected by these downturns.

The demand for our products depends in part on the market conditions in the industries and geographies into which they are sold. Fluctuations in demand for our products or a market decline in any of these industries or geographies would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.

Our business is dependent upon the market for desktop and notebook PCs and servers. Historically, a significant portion of our Computing Solutions revenue has been related to desktop PCs. Industry-wide fluctuations in the computer marketplace have materially adversely affected us in the past, are currently affecting us and may materially adversely affect us in the future. As a result of macroeconomic challenges that recently affected the global economy in 2008 and 2009, end-user demand for PCs and servers decreased significantly. Although end-user PC demand increased in the first half of 2010, the pace of that growth slowed in the second half of 2010. In addition, form factors have steadily shifted from desktop PCs to mobile PCs over the past three years, and we expect that this trajectory will continue.

The growth of our business is also dependent on continued demand for our products from high-growth global markets. If demand from these markets is below our expectations, sales of our products may decrease, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

The markets in which our products are sold are highly competitive.

The markets in which our products are sold are very competitive, and delivering the latest and best products to market on a timely basis is critical to achieving revenue growth. We believe that the main factors that determine our product competitiveness are timely product introductions, product quality, power consumption (including battery life), reliability, selling price, speed, size (or form factor), cost, adherence to industry standards (and the creation of open industry standards), software and hardware compatibility and stability and brand awareness.

24

Table of Contents

We expect that competition will continue to be intense due to rapid technological changes, frequent product introductions by our competitors of products that provide better performance or include additional features that render our products uncompetitive and aggressive pricing by competitors, especially during challenging economic times. For example, since their introduction, tablets have experienced increasing adoption by consumers. Tablet sales could negatively impact sales of PCs to consumers, which could adversely impact our business. Also, Intel has transitioned to 32nm process technology and is transitioning to 28nm process technology before us. Using a more advanced process technology can contribute to lower product manufacturing costs and improve a product’s performance and power efficiency. Some competitors may have greater access or rights to companion technologies, including interface, processor and memory technical information. Competitive pressures could adversely impact the demand for our products, which could harm our business.

Our operating results are subject to quarterly and seasonal sales patterns.

A substantial portion of our quarterly sales have historically been made in the last month of the quarter. This uneven sales pattern makes prediction of revenues for each financial period difficult and increases the risk of unanticipated variations in quarterly results and financial condition. In addition, our operating results tend to vary seasonally. For example, historically, demand in the retail sector of the PC market is often stronger during the fourth quarter as a result of the winter holiday season and weaker in the first quarter. European sales have also been historically weaker during the summer months. Many of the factors that create and affect seasonal trends are beyond our control.

If essential equipment or materials are not available to manufacture our products, we could be materially adversely affected.

We purchase equipment and materials for our internal back-end manufacturing operations from a number of suppliers and our operations depend upon obtaining deliveries of adequate supplies of equipment and materials on a timely basis. Our third party manufacturing suppliers also depend on the same timely delivery of adequate quantities of equipment and materials in the manufacture of our products. Certain equipment and materials that are used in the manufacture of our products are available only from a limited number of suppliers. For example, in manufacturing our microprocessor and APU products, GF is largely dependent on one supplier of our silicon-on-insulator (SOI) wafers. We also depend on a limited number of suppliers to provide the majority of certain types of integrated circuit packages for our microprocessor and APU products. Similarly, certain non-proprietary materials or components such as memory, PCBs, substrates and capacitors used in the manufacture of our graphics products are currently available from only a limited number of sources. Because some of the equipment and materials that we and our third party manufacturing suppliers purchase are complex, it is sometimes difficult to substitute one supplier for another.

From time to time, suppliers may extend lead times, limit supply or increase prices due to capacity constraints or other factors. Also, some of these materials and components may be subject to rapid changes in price and availability. Interruption of supply or increased demand in the industry could cause shortages and price increases in various essential materials. Dependence on a sole supplier or a limited number of suppliers exacerbates these risks. If we and our third party manufacturing suppliers are unable to procure certain of these materials, or our foundries are unable to procure materials for manufacturing our products, our business would be materially adversely affected.

Our issuance to WCH of warrants to purchase 35,000,000 shares of our common stock, if and when exercised by WCH, will dilute the ownership interests of our existing stockholders, and the conversion of the remainder of our 5.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes may dilute the ownership interest of our existing stockholders.

The warrants issued to WCH became exercisable in July 2009. Any issuance by us of additional shares to WCH upon exercise of the warrants will dilute the ownership interests of our existing stockholders. Any sales in

25

Table of Contents

the public market by WCH of any shares owned by WCH could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock, and the anticipated exercise by WCH of the warrants could depress the price of our common stock.

Moreover, the conversion of our remaining 5.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes may dilute the ownership interests of our existing stockholders. The conversion of the 5.75% Notes and the 6.00% Notes could have a dilutive effect on our earnings per share to the extent that the price of our common stock exceeds the conversion price of the 5.75% Notes and 6.00% Notes. Any sales in the public market of our common stock issuable upon conversion of the 5.75% Notes or 6.00% Notes could adversely affect prevailing market prices of our common stock. In addition, the conversion of the 5.75% Notes or 6.00% Notes into cash and shares of our common stock could depress the price of our common stock.

If our products are not compatible with some or all industry-standard software and hardware, we could be materially adversely affected.

Our products may not be fully compatible with some or all industry-standard software and hardware. Further, we may be unsuccessful in correcting any such compatibility problems in a timely manner. If our customers are unable to achieve compatibility with software or hardware after our products are shipped in volume, we could be materially adversely affected. In addition, the mere announcement of an incompatibility problem relating to our products could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Costs related to defective products could have a material adverse effect on us.

Products as complex as those we offer may contain defects or failures when first introduced or when new versions or enhancements to existing products are released. We cannot assure you that, despite our testing procedures, errors will not be found in new products or releases after commencement of commercial shipments in the future, which could result in loss of or delay in market acceptance of our products, material recall and replacement costs, delay in recognition or loss of revenues, writing down the inventory of defective products, the diversion of the attention of our engineering personnel from product development efforts, defending against litigation related to defective products or related property damage or personal injury, and damage to our reputation in the industry and could adversely affect our relationships with our customers. In addition, we may have difficulty identifying the end customers of the defective products in the field. As a result, we could incur substantial costs to implement modifications to correct defects. Any of these problems could materially adversely affect our business.

We could be subject to potential product liability claims if one of our products causes, or merely appears to have caused, an injury. Claims may be made by consumers or others selling our products, and we may be subject to claims against us even if an alleged injury is due to the actions of others. A product liability claim, recall or other claim with respect to uninsured liabilities or for amounts in excess of insured liabilities could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Our receipt of royalty revenues is dependent upon our technology being designed into third-party products and the success of those products.

Our graphics technology for game consoles is used in game consoles, including the Nintendo Wii and Microsoft Xbox 360. The revenues that we receive from these products are in the form of non-recurring engineering fees charged for design and development services, as well as royalties paid to us by these third parties. Our royalty revenues are directly related to the sales of these products and reflective of their success in the market. If these third parties do not include our graphics technology in future generations of their game consoles, our revenues from royalties would decline significantly. Moreover, we have no control over the marketing efforts of these third parties and we cannot make any assurances that sales of those products will achieve expected levels in the current or future fiscal years. Consequently, the revenues from royalties expected by us from these products may not be fully realized, and our operating results may be adversely affected.

26

Table of Contents

If we fail to maintain the efficiency of our supply chain as we respond to increases or changes in customer demand for our products, our business could be materially adversely affected.

Our ability to meet customer demand for our products depends, in part, on our ability to deliver the products our customers want on a timely basis. Accordingly, we rely on our supply chain for the manufacturing, distribution and fulfillment of our products. As we continue to grow our business, acquire new OEM customers and strengthen relationships with existing OEM customers, the efficiency of our supply chain will become increasingly important because OEMs tend to have specific requirements for particular products, and specific time-frames in which they require delivery of these products. If we are unable to consistently deliver the right products to our customers on a timely basis in the right locations, our customers may reduce the quantities they order from us, which could have a material adverse affect on our business.

We outsource to third parties certain supply-chain logistics functions, including portions of our product distribution, transportation management, and information technology support services.

We rely on third-party providers to operate our regional product distribution centers and to manage the transportation of our work-in-process and finished products among our facilities, our manufacturing suppliers and to our customers. In addition, we rely on third parties to provide certain information technology services to us, including helpdesk support, desktop application services, business and software support applications, server and storage administration, data center operations, database administration, and voice, video and remote access. We cannot guarantee that these providers will fulfill their respective responsibilities in a timely manner in accordance with the contract terms, in which case our internal operations and the distribution of our products to our customers could be materially adversely affected. Also, we cannot guarantee that our contracts with these third-party providers will be renewed, in which case we would have to transition these functions in-house or secure new providers, which could have a material adverse effect on our business if the transition is not executed appropriately.

Uncertainties involving the ordering and shipment of our products could materially adversely affect us.

We typically sell our products pursuant to individual purchase orders. We generally do not have long-term supply arrangements with our customers or minimum purchase requirements except that orders generally must be for standard pack quantities. Generally, our customers may cancel orders more than 30 days prior to shipment without incurring significant fees. We base our inventory levels on customers’ estimates of demand for their products, which may not accurately predict the quantity or type of our products that our customers will want in the future or ultimately end up purchasing. Our ability to forecast demand is even further complicated when we sell indirectly through distributors, as our forecasts for demand are then based on estimates provided by multiple parties. Moreover, PC and consumer markets are characterized by short product lifecycles, which can lead to rapid obsolescence and price erosion. In addition, our customers may change their inventory practices on short notice for any reason. We may build inventories during periods of anticipated growth, and the cancellation or deferral of product orders or overproduction due to failure of anticipated orders to materialize, could result in excess or obsolete inventory, which could result in write-downs of inventory and an adverse effect on gross margins. Factors that may result in excess or obsolete inventory, which could result in write-downs of the value of our inventory, a reduction in the average selling price, and/or a reduction in our gross margin include:

Because market conditions are uncertain, these and other factors could materially adversely affect our business.

27

Table of Contents

Our reliance on third-party distributors and add-in-board partners (AIBs) subjects us to certain risks.

We market and sell our products directly and through third-party distributors and AIBs pursuant to agreements that can generally be terminated for convenience by either party upon prior notice to the other party. These agreements are non-exclusive and permit both our distributors and AIBs to offer our competitors’ products. We are dependent on our distributors and AIBs to supplement our direct marketing and sales efforts. If any significant distributor or AIB or a substantial number of our distributors or AIBs terminated their relationship with us or decided to market our competitors’ products over our products, our ability to bring our products to market would be impacted and we would be materially adversely affected.

Additionally, distributors and AIBs typically maintain an inventory of our products. In most instances, our agreements with distributors protect their inventory of our products against price reductions, as well as provide return rights for any product that we have removed from our price book and that is not more than twelve months older than the manufacturing code date. Some agreements with our distributors also contain standard stock rotation provisions permitting limited levels of product returns. Our agreements with AIBs protect their inventory of our products against price reductions. We defer the gross margins on our sales to distributors and AIBs, resulting from both our deferral of revenue and related product costs, until the applicable products are re-sold by the distributors or the AIBs. However, in the event of a significant decline in the price of our products, the price protection rights we offer would materially adversely affect us because our revenue would decline.

Our worldwide operations are subject to political and economic risks and natural disasters, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

We maintain operations around the world, including in the United States, Canada, Europe and Asia. We rely on third party wafer foundries in Europe and Asia. Nearly all product assembly and final testing of our products is performed at manufacturing facilities, operated by us as well as third party manufacturing facilities, in China, Malaysia, Singapore and Taiwan. We also have international sales operations. International sales, as a percent of net revenue were 88% in 2010. We expect that international sales will continue to be a significant portion of total sales in the foreseeable future.

The political and economic risks associated with our operations in foreign countries include, without limitation:

In addition, our worldwide operations could be subject to natural disasters such as earthquakes, typhoons and volcanic eruptions that disrupt manufacturing or other operations. For example, our Sunnyvale operations are

28

Table of Contents

located near major earthquake fault lines in California. Any conflict or uncertainty in the countries in which we operate, including public health or safety, natural disasters or general economic factors, could have a material adverse effect on our business. Any of the above risks, should they occur, could result in an increase in the cost of components, production delays, general business interruptions, delays from difficulties in obtaining export licenses for certain technology, tariffs and other barriers and restrictions, potentially longer payment cycles, potentially increased taxes, restrictions on the repatriation of funds and the burdens of complying with a variety of foreign laws, any of which could ultimately have a material adverse effect on our business.

Worldwide economic and political conditions may adversely affect demand for our products.

Economic instability in the United States could negatively impact our business. Continued uncertainty over the worldwide economic environment may adversely impact consumer confidence and spending, causing our customers to postpone purchases.

Moreover, political conditions may create uncertainties that could adversely affect our business. The United States has been and may continue to be involved in armed conflicts that could have a further impact on our sales and our supply chain. The consequences of armed conflicts are unpredictable and we may not be able to foresee events that could have a material adverse effect on us. Also, the occurrence and threat of terrorist attacks and the consequences of sustained military action in the Middle East have in the past, and may in the future, adversely affect demand for our products. Terrorist attacks may negatively affect our operations, directly or indirectly, and such attacks or related armed conflicts may directly impact our physical facilities or those of our suppliers or customers. Furthermore, these attacks may make travel and the transportation of our products more difficult and more expensive, which could materially adversely affect us. Any of these events could cause consumer spending to decrease or result in increased volatility in the United States economy and worldwide financial markets.

Unfavorable currency exchange rate fluctuations could continue to adversely affect us.

We have costs, assets and liabilities that are denominated in foreign currencies, primarily the euro and Canadian dollar. As a consequence, movements in exchange rates could cause our foreign currency denominated expenses to increase as a percentage of revenue, affecting our profitability and cash flows. In the past, the value of the U.S. dollar has fallen significantly, leading to increasingly unfavorable currency exchange rates on foreign denominated expenses. Whenever we believe appropriate, we hedge a portion of our short-term foreign currency exposure to protect against fluctuations in currency exchange rates. We determine our total foreign currency exposure using projections of long-term expenditures for items such as payroll. We cannot assure you that these activities will be effective in reducing foreign exchange rate exposure. Failure to do so could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flow. In addition, the majority of our product sales are denominated in U.S. dollars. Fluctuations in the exchange rate between the U.S. dollar and the local currency can cause increases or decreases in the cost of our products in the local currency of such customers. An appreciation of the U.S. dollar relative to the local currency could reduce sales of our products.

Our inability to effectively control the sales of our products on the gray market could have a material adverse effect on us.

We market and sell our products directly to OEMs and through authorized third-party distributors. From time to time, our products are diverted from our authorized distribution channels and are sold on the “gray market.” Gray market products result in shadow inventory that is not visible to us, thus making it difficult to forecast demand accurately. Also, when gray market products enter the market, we and our distribution channel compete with these heavily discounted gray market products, which adversely affects demand for our products and negatively impact our margins. In addition, our inability to control gray market activities could result in customer satisfaction issues because any time products are purchased outside our authorized distribution channel there is a risk that our customers are buying counterfeit or substandard products, including products that may have been altered, mishandled or damaged, or used products represented as new.

29

Table of Contents

If we cannot adequately protect our technology or other intellectual property in the United States and abroad, through patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trademarks and other measures, we may lose a competitive advantage and incur significant expenses.

We rely on a combination of protections provided by contracts, including confidentiality and nondisclosure agreements, copyrights, patents, trademarks and common law rights, such as trade secrets, to protect our intellectual property. However, we cannot assure you that we will be able to adequately protect our technology or other intellectual property from third-party infringement or from misappropriation in the United States and abroad. Any patent licensed by us or issued to us could be challenged, invalidated or circumvented or rights granted there under may not provide a competitive advantage to us. Furthermore, patent applications that we file may not result in issuance of a patent or, if a patent is issued, the patent may not be issued in a form that is advantageous to us. Despite our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights, others may independently develop similar products, duplicate our products or design around our patents and other rights. In addition, it is difficult to monitor compliance with, and enforce, our intellectual property on a worldwide basis in a cost-effective manner. In jurisdictions where foreign laws provide less intellectual property protection than afforded in the United States and abroad, our technology or other intellectual property may be compromised, and our business would be materially adversely affected.

We are party to litigation and may become a party to other claims or litigation that could cause us to incur substantial costs or pay substantial damages or prohibit us from selling our products.

From time to time we are a defendant or plaintiff in various legal actions. We also sell products to consumers, which could increase our exposure to consumer actions such as product liability claims. On occasion, we receive claims that individuals were allegedly exposed to substances used in our former semiconductor wafer manufacturing facilities and that this alleged exposure caused harm. Litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and its outcome is uncertain. Any claim that is successfully asserted against us may result in the payment of damages that could be material to our business.

With respect to intellectual property litigation, from time to time, we have been notified, or third parties may bring or have brought actions against us, based on allegations that we are infringing the intellectual property rights of others. If any such claims are asserted against us, we may seek to obtain a license under the third parties’ intellectual property rights. We cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain all of the necessary licenses on satisfactory terms, if at all. In the event that we do not obtain a license, these parties may file lawsuits against us seeking damages (potentially up to and including treble damages) or an injunction against the sale of our products that incorporate allegedly infringed intellectual property or against the operation of our business as presently conducted, which could result in our having to stop the sale of some of our products or to increase the costs of selling some of our products or which could damage our reputation. The award of damages, including material royalty payments, or the entry of an injunction against the manufacture and sale of some or all of our products, would have a material adverse effect on us. We could decide, in the alternative, to redesign our products or to resort to litigation to challenge such claims. Such challenges could be extremely expensive and time-consuming regardless of their merit, could cause delays in product release or shipment, and/or could have a material adverse effect on us. We cannot assure you that litigation related to our intellectual property rights or the intellectual property rights of others can always be avoided or successfully concluded.

Even if we were to prevail, any litigation could be costly and time-consuming and would divert the attention of our management and key personnel from our business operations, which could have a material adverse effect on us.

Certain individuals have been charged by federal authorities with illegally trading in our stock using certain AMD confidential information.

Several individuals have pled guilty to conspiracy and securities fraud charges and, among other things, providing confidential information about us to a person who has been charged by federal authorities with

30

Table of Contents

illegally trading in our stock on the basis of that confidential information. In addition, one former employee has been charged in connection with ongoing proceedings relating to illegally trading in our stock using certain AMD confidential information. At this time, we cannot give any assurances as to whether any facts that may be discovered during the proceedings relating to this matter or other similar matters will be damaging to our business, results of operations or reputation.

Failures in the global credit markets have impacted and may continue to impact the liquidity of our auction rate securities.

As of December 25, 2010, the par value of all our auction rate securities, or ARS, was $66 million with an estimated fair value of $57 million. As of December 25, 2010, our investments in ARS included estimated fair values of approximately $32 million of student loan ARS and $25 million of municipal and corporate ARS. The uncertainties in the credit markets have affected all of our ARS and auctions for these securities have failed to settle on their respective settlement dates. The auctions failed because there was insufficient demand for these securities. A failed auction does not represent a default by the issuer of the ARS. For each unsuccessful auction, the interest rate is reset based on a formula set forth in each security, which is generally higher than the current market unless subject to an interest rate cap. When auctions for these securities fail, the investments may not be readily convertible to cash until a future auction of these investments is successful, a buyer is found outside of the auction process, the issuers of the ARS establish a different form of financing to replace these securities or redeem them, or final payment is due according to contractual maturities (currently, ranging from 2030 to 2050 for our ARS). Although we have had redemptions since the failed auctions began, the liquidity of these investments continues to be adversely impacted.

We cannot predict with certainty when liquidity in the ARS market will return. If this market illiquidity continues or worsens, we may be required to record additional impairment charges with respect to these investments in the future, which could adversely impact our results of operations.

We are subject to a variety of environmental laws that could result in liabilities.

Our operations and properties have in the past and continue to be subject to various United States and foreign environmental laws and regulations, including those relating to materials used in our products and manufacturing processes, discharge of pollutants into the environment, the treatment, transport, storage and disposal of solid and hazardous wastes, and remediation of contamination. These laws and regulations require us to obtain permits for our operations, including the discharge of air pollutants and wastewater. Although our management systems are designed to maintain compliance, we cannot assure you that we have been or will be at all times in complete compliance with such laws, regulations and permits. If we violate or fail to comply with any of them, a range of consequences could result, including fines, suspension of production, alteration of manufacturing processes, import/export restrictions, sales limitations, criminal and civil liabilities or other sanctions. We could also be held liable for any and all consequences arising out of exposure to hazardous materials used, stored, released, disposed of by us or located at, under or emanating from our facilities or other environmental or natural resource damage.

Certain environmental laws, including the U.S. Comprehensive, Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act of 1980, or the Superfund Act, impose strict, or under certain circumstances, joint and several liability on current and previous owners or operators of real property for the cost of removal or remediation of hazardous substances and impose liability for damages to natural resources. These laws often impose liability even if the owner or operator did not know of, or was not responsible for, the release of such hazardous substances. These environmental laws also assess liability on persons who arrange for hazardous substances to be sent to disposal or treatment facilities when such facilities are found to be contaminated. Such persons can be responsible for cleanup costs even if they never owned or operated the contaminated facility. We have been named as a responsible party at three Superfund sites in Sunnyvale, California. Although we have not yet been, we could be named a potentially responsible party at other Superfund or contaminated sites in the future. In addition, contamination that has not yet been identified could exist at our other facilities.

31

Table of Contents

Environmental laws are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent over time. For example, the European Union (EU) and China are two among a growing number of jurisdictions that have enacted in recent years restrictions on the use of lead, among other chemicals, in electronic products with other countries considering similar restrictions. These regulations affect semiconductor packaging. There is a risk that the cost, quality and manufacturing yields of lead-free products may be less favorable compared to lead-based products or that the transition to lead-free products may produce sudden changes in demand, which may result in excess inventory. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act contains provisions to improve the transparency and accountability concerning the supply of minerals coming from the conflict zones of the DRC. As a result, the SEC is required to promulgate by April 15, 2011, new annual disclosure and reporting requirements for those companies who use “conflict” minerals mined from the DRC and adjoining countries in their products. The implementation of these requirements could affect the sourcing and availability of minerals used in the manufacture of semiconductor devices. As a result, there may only be a limited pool of suppliers who provide conflict free metals, and we cannot assure you that we will be able to obtain products in sufficient quantities or at competitive prices. Also, since our supply chain is complex, we may face reputational challenges with our customers and other stakeholders if we are unable to sufficiently verify the origins for all metals used in our products through the due diligence procedures that we implement.

Other regulatory requirements potentially affecting our back-end manufacturing processes and the design and marketing of our products are in development throughout the world. In addition, a number of jurisdictions including the EU, Australia and China are considering market entry requirements for computers based on the ENERGY STAR specification (Version 5.0) as well as additional limits. The proposed requirements, which have not yet been finalized, could potentially be approved and implemented as early as the fourth quarter of 2011. If such requirements are implemented in the proposed time frame and to the proposed specification there is the potential for certain of our microprocessor, chipset and GPU products, as incorporated in desktop and mobile PCs, being excluded from these markets which could materially adversely affect us.

While we have budgeted for foreseeable associated expenditures, we cannot assure you that future environmental legal requirements will not become more stringent or costly in the future. Therefore, we cannot assure you that our costs of complying with current and future environmental and health and safety laws, and our liabilities arising from past and future releases of, or exposure to, hazardous substances will not have a material adverse effect on us.

Our business is subject to potential tax liabilities.

We are subject to income taxes in the United States, Canada and other foreign jurisdictions. Significant judgment is required in determining our worldwide provision for income taxes. In the ordinary course of our business, there are many transactions and calculations where the ultimate tax determination is uncertain. Although we believe our tax estimates are reasonable, we cannot assure you that the final determination of any tax audits and litigation will not be materially different from that which is reflected in historical income tax provisions and accruals. Should additional taxes be assessed as a result of an audit or litigation, there could be a material adverse effect on our cash, income tax provision and net income in the period or periods for which that determination is made.

We have not received any written comments that were issued not less than 180 days before December 25, 2010, the end of the fiscal year covered by this report, from the Securities and Exchange Commission staff regarding our periodic or current reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 that remain unresolved.

At December 25, 2010, we owned principal research and development, engineering, manufacturing, warehouse and administrative facilities located in the United States, Canada, Taiwan, China, Singapore and Malaysia. These facilities totaled approximately 2.4 million square feet.

32

Table of Contents

Our main facility with respect to our graphics and chipset products is located in Markham, Ontario, Canada. This facility consists of approximately 240,000 square feet of office and research and development space. We occupy two other facilities in Markham, Ontario that comprise over 215,000 square feet, including approximately 65,000 square-feet of manufacturing and warehouse space. We also currently own and operate three microprocessor assembly and test facilities comprising an aggregate of 465,000 square feet. Our current microprocessor assembly and test facilities are located in Malaysia, Singapore and China and are described in further detail in the “Assembly, Test, Mark and Packaging Facilities,” above.

In some cases, we lease all or a portion of the land on which our facilities are located. We lease approximately 218,000 square feet of land in Singapore and 422,000 square feet of land in Suzhou, China for our microprocessor assembly and test facilities.

As of December 25, 2010, we also leased approximately 3.2 million square feet of space for engineering, manufacturing, warehouse and administrative use, including a number of smaller regional sales offices located in commercial centers near customers, principally in the United States, Latin America, Europe and Asia. These leases expire at varying dates through 2018.

We also have approximately 310,000 square feet of building space that is currently vacant. We continue to have lease obligations with respect to this space that expire at various dates through 2012. We are actively marketing this space for sublease.

We currently do not anticipate difficulty in either retaining occupancy of any of our facilities through lease renewals prior to expiration or through month-to-month occupancy, or replacing them with equivalent facilities.

We believe that our existing facilities are suitable and adequate for our present purposes, and that, except as discussed above, the productive capacity of such facilities is substantially being utilized or we have plans to utilize it.

In addition to ordinary routine litigation incidental to the business, AMD or its indirectly wholly-owned subsidiary, ATI, is party to the following material legal proceedings. The outcome of any litigation is uncertain, and, should any of the actions or proceedings where we are a defendant be successful, we may be subject to significant damages awards which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

AMD v. Samsung Electronics Co. et al.

On February 19, 2008, AMD and ATI filed a complaint against Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. (Samsung) and related Samsung entities alleging infringement of six AMD patents. The complaint was amended in May 2008 to add a seventh patent and also to add two additional Samsung entities as defendants to the suit. The case was filed in U.S. District Court, Northern District of California. The AMD patents generally relate to semiconductors, semiconductor memory, and related products. AMD sought damages and injunctive relief. Samsung filed an answer and counterclaims, alleging infringement by AMD and/or ATI of six Samsung patents. The Samsung patents generally relate to semiconductor fabrication and design. Samsung sought damages and injunctive relief.

On December 22, 2010, we entered into a Patent License and Settlement Agreement with Samsung. Pursuant to this agreement, all claims between the parties were dismissed with prejudice, and Samsung agreed to pay us $283 million less any withholding taxes not to exceed a maximum rate of 16.5%. We received the first payment of $119 million (which represents $143 million less withholding taxes) in December 2010. The remaining amount of $117 million (which represents $140 million less withholding taxes) will be paid in two equal installments by May 31, 2011 and November 30, 2011.

33

Table of Contents

SGI (Graphics Properties Holding, Inc.) v. ATI and AMD, Case No.06-C-0611 in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin

On October 23, 2006, Silicon Graphics Inc. (SGI) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against ATI and AMD in the United States District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, the original SGI v. ATI suit. SGI alleged that certain ATI products infringe U.S. Patent No. 6,650,327 (the ‘327 patent) and later amended its complaint to add two additional patents. AMD asserted counterclaims against SGI. SGI later abandoned its claims as to one patent, the District Court granted AMD’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement as to a second patent, and the District Court also granted in part AMD’s motion for summary judgment of non-infringement on the ‘327 patent. Immediately following the District Court’s entry of partial summary judgment, SGI moved to dismiss its remaining infringement claims, and those claims were dismissed. The District Court granted AMD’s request to proceed with the trial on AMD’s counterclaims of invalidity and inequitable conduct. The jury verdict on February 8, 2008, found that certain claims of one of SGI’s patents were not invalid, and the District Court subsequently dismissed an inequitable conduct claim raised by AMD. AMD and SGI both appealed various aspects of the District Court’s rulings to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

On April 1, 2009, SGI filed for bankruptcy, and through the bankruptcy proceeding changed its name to Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (“GPHI”). The Court of Appeals postponed the oral argument based on the automatic stay provisions of the bankruptcy code and the intertwined nature of AMD and SGI/GPHI’s appeals. On August 12, 2009, the bankruptcy court overseeing the SGI/GPHI matter issued an order lifting the stay, and SGI/GPHI requested that the Court of Appeals reschedule the oral argument. Oral argument took place on November 3, 2009. On June 4, 2010, the Court of Appeals issued an opinion in which it reversed portions of the Wisconsin District Court’s decision. The case was subsequently remanded to the Wisconsin District Court. On November 10, 2010, a Preliminary Pretrial Conference Order was filed to set the schedule for the case. The trial has been set for May 9, 2011. On January 31, 2011, the District Court entered an order on threshold issues, which, among other things, permits AMD to pursue its invalidity affirmative defense at trial and does not permit SGI to accuse AMD’s R7xx series of graphics products of infringement in this case. Pursuant to this order, SGI, which had asked to change its damages expert, may substitute its experts, but new experts are bound by the opinions already expressed by the former experts to the same extent the original experts would be. SGI served its damages report on February 7, 2011; however, the report is subject to the protective order entered by the District Court.

Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (GPHI) v. Nintendo, Acer, Sony, Apple, and Toshiba, Cause No. 10-CV-08655 in the Southern District of New York

On November 16, 2010, GPHI (see SGI v ATI, above) filed suit against several AMD customers alleging infringement of the ‘327 patent identified in the original SGI v. ATI suit. All defendants except Nintendo are also accused of infringing U.S. Patent No. 7,518,615 (the ‘615 patent). Both patents relate to three-dimensional graphics. AMD has received requests for indemnification from some of the defendants in this lawsuit and is evaluating these requests.

Graphics Properties Holdings, Inc. (GPHI) v. Dell, Alienware, Lenovo, Gateway, and Hewlett-Packard, Cause No. 10-CV-00992 in the District of Delaware

On November 18, 2010, GPHI (see SGI v ATI above) filed suit against several AMD customers alleging infringement of two patents: the ‘327 patent identified in the original SGI v. ATI suit and the ‘615 patent. Both patents relate to three-dimensional graphics. AMD has received requests for indemnification from some of the defendants in this lawsuit and is evaluating these requests.

Environmental Matters

We are named as a responsible party on Superfund clean-up orders for three sites in Sunnyvale, California that are on the National Priorities List. Since 1981, we have discovered hazardous material releases to the groundwater from former underground tanks and proceeded to investigate and conduct remediation at these three

34

Table of Contents

sites. The chemicals released into the groundwater were commonly used in the semiconductor industry in the United States in the wafer fabrication process prior to 1979.

In 1991, the Company received Final Site Clean-up Requirements Orders from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board relating to the three sites. We have entered into settlement agreements with other responsible parties on two of the orders. During the term of such agreements other parties have agreed to assume most of the foreseeable costs as well as the primary role in conducting remediation activities under the orders. We remain responsible for additional costs beyond the scope of the agreements as well as all remaining costs in the event that the other parties do not fulfill their obligations under the settlement agreements.

To address anticipated future remediation costs under the orders, we have computed and recorded an estimated environmental liability of approximately $3.6 million and have not recorded any potential insurance recoveries in determining the estimated costs of the cleanup. The progress of future remediation efforts cannot be predicted with certainty and these costs may change. We believe that the potential liability, if any, in excess of amounts already accrued, will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Other Matters

We are a defendant or plaintiff in various other actions that arose in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, the aggregate liability, if any, with respect to these matters will not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

35

Table of Contents

PART II

Our common stock (symbol “AMD”) is listed on the New York Stock Exchange. On February 14, 2011, there were 7,389 registered holders of our common stock. The following table sets forth on a per share basis the high and low intra-day sales prices on the New York Stock Exchange for our common stock for the periods indicated:

Currently, we do not have any plans to pay dividends on our common stock. Under the terms of our Indenture for the 8.125% Senior Notes due 2017 dated November 30, 2009 with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee and our Indenture for the 7.75% Senior Notes due 2020 dated August 4, 2010 with Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., as Trustee, we are prohibited from paying cash dividends if the aggregate amount of dividends and other restricted payments made by us since entering into each Indenture would exceed the sum of specified financial measures including fifty percent of consolidated net income as that term is defined in the Indentures.

The information under the caption “Equity Compensation Plan Information” in our 2011 Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by reference.

We have an ongoing authorization from the Board of Directors to repurchase up to $300 million worth of our common stock over a period of time to be determined by management. These repurchases may be made in the open market or in privately negotiated transactions from time to time in compliance with applicable rules and regulations, subject to market conditions, applicable legal requirements and other factors. We are not required to repurchase any particular amount of our common stock. During 2010, we did not repurchase any of our equity securities pursuant to this authorization.

36

Table of Contents

Performance Graph

Comparison of Five-Year Cumulative Total Returns

Advanced Micro Devices, S&P 500 Index and S&P 500 Semiconductor Index

The following graph shows a five-year comparison of cumulative total return on our common stock, the S&P 500 Index and the S&P 500 Semiconductor Index from December 23, 2005 through December 25, 2010. The past performance of our common stock is no indication of future performance.

37

Table of Contents

Five Years Ended December 25, 2010

(In millions except per share amounts)

38

Table of Contents

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements as of December 25, 2010 and December 26, 2009 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 25, 2010 and related notes, which are included in this Form 10-K as well as with the other sections of this Form 10-K, including “Part I, Item 1: Business,” “Part II, Item 6: Selected Financial Data,” and “Part II, Item 8: Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

Introduction

We are a global semiconductor company with facilities around the world. Within the global semiconductor industry, we offer primarily:

In MD&A, we will describe the general financial condition and the results of operations for Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. and its consolidated subsidiaries, including a discussion of our results of operations for 2010 compared to 2009 and 2009 compared to 2008, an analysis of changes in our financial condition and a discussion of our contractual obligations and off balance sheet arrangements. For accounting purposes, we consolidated the accounts of GLOBALFOUNDRIES, Inc. (GF) and its consolidated subsidiaries from March 2, 2009 through December 26, 2009. Accordingly, for this period, references in this Item 7 and in Item 8 “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” to “us,” “our,” or “AMD” include the consolidated operating results of AMD and its consolidated subsidiaries, including GF and its consolidated subsidiaries.

Overview

Entering 2010, our most important goals were: to deliver winning platform products; to differentiate ourselves with our graphics technology; to launch the AMD Fusion family of APUs and to demonstrate the success of our financial and business models focusing on semiconductor design.

In 2010, we delivered a number of new products. In April 2010, we launched our new mainstream and enthusiast desktop platforms, and in May 2010, we launched two notebook platforms targeted at the mainstream market and the small and thin-and-light notebook market. At a time when visual computing is becoming an increasingly important part of the user experience, we introduced the industry’s first mobile graphics processor with Microsoft DirectX^® 11 (DX 11) gaming support for notebook computers and extended this family of DX 11 capable graphics into the mainstream and value segments of the PC market. Also, for servers, we launched our AMD Opteron 6000 series and Opteron 4000 series platforms, targeting the performance and value conscious markets. At the end of 2010, we had more than 70 designs with the major OEMs. However, despite the number of systems, we did not have the volume of sales that we would have liked, and we expect to increase our focus on this opportunity in 2011. Also in 2010, although we experienced a delay in delivering our APU manufactured using 32nm technology, we shipped the first of our AMD Fusion family of APU processor products featuring our new x86 CPU core, codenamed “Bobcat.”

On a macroeconomic level, consumer demand for end-user PC products grew in the first half of 2010, but the pace of that growth slowed in the second half of 2010. Despite the more challenging economic environment in the latter half of 2010, we were profitable in 2010. Our financial results improved in 2010 compared to 2009 as the demand for our Graphics and Computing Solutions segment products increased. Net revenue for 2010 was $6.5 billion, a 20% increase compared to net revenue of $5.4 billion for 2009, and during 2010, our sales in

39

Table of Contents

China and Japan increased significantly by $561 million and $255 million, respectively, as compared to 2009. Beginning in the first quarter of 2010, we deconsolidated GF, and began accounting for our investment in GF under the equity method of accounting. Entering 2011, we announced that we will be applying the cost method of accounting for our investment in GF, and will no longer recognize any share of GF’s net income or loss in our consolidated statements of operations.

In 2010, we also made significant progress in improving our balance sheet by reducing our debt and adjusting our debt maturity schedule. Without taking into account GF’s debt, in the aggregate, we reduced our debt by approximately $357 million during 2010. Specifically, during 2010, we repurchased $1,016 million in aggregate principal amount of our outstanding 6.00% Senior Notes due 2015 (6.00% Notes), reducing the outstanding aggregate principal amount to $780 million, and we issued $500 million of 7.75% Senior Notes due 2020 (7.75% Notes). Our debt and capital lease obligations as of December 25, 2010 were $2.4 billion, which reflects the debt discount adjustment of $103 million on our 6.00% Notes and 8.125% Senior Notes Due 2017 (8.125% Notes). This amount also includes approximately $229 million related to our accounts receivable financing arrangement with IBM, which is not a cash obligation and is described in more detail in the “Financial Condition –Liquidity” section below. Furthermore, GAAP net cash used in operating activities was $412 million. We also generated non-GAAP adjusted free cash flow, which we describe in more detail in the “Financial Condition –Liquidity” section, of $355 million. Our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of December 25, 2010 were $1.8 billion compared to $2.7 billion at December 26, 2009, of which $904 million represented GF cash and cash equivalents. Without taking into account the GF financial position, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were essentially flat when compared to 2009.

GLOBALFOUNDRIES

Formation and Accounting in 2009

On March 2, 2009, we consummated the transactions contemplated by the Master Transaction Agreement among us, ATIC, and WCH, pursuant to which we formed GF. At the closing of these transactions (the Closing), we contributed certain assets and liabilities to GF, including, among other things, shares of the groups of German subsidiaries owning our manufacturing facilities, certain manufacturing assets, real property, tangible personal property, employees, inventories, books and records, a portion of our patent portfolio, intellectual property and technology, rights under certain material contracts and authorizations necessary for GF to carry on its business. In exchange we received GF securities consisting of one Class A Ordinary Share, 1,090,950 Class A Preferred Shares and 700,000 Class B Preferred Shares, and the assumption of certain liabilities by GF. ATIC contributed $1.4 billion of cash to GF in exchange for GF securities consisting of one Class A Ordinary Share, 218,190 Class A Preferred Shares, 172,760 Class B Preferred Shares, $202 million aggregate principal amount of 4% Class A Subordinated Convertible Notes (the Class A Notes) and $807 million aggregate principal amount of 11% Class B Subordinated Convertible Notes (the Class B Notes), and transferred $700 million of cash to us in exchange for the transfer by us of 700,000 GF Class B Preferred Shares.

At the Closing, we also issued to WCH, for an aggregate purchase price of $125 million, 58 million shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase 35 million shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $0.01 per share (the Warrants). The Warrants are currently exercisable and expire on March 2, 2019. The shares issuable under these Warrants have been included in our basic and diluted earnings per share calculation since the third quarter of 2009 when the Warrants became exercisable.

Under the Master Transaction Agreement, the cash consideration that WCH and ATIC paid and the securities that they received are as follows:

40

Table of Contents

At the Closing, AMD and ATIC owned 1,090,950, or 83%, and 218,190, or 17%, respectively, of Class A Preferred Shares, and ATIC owned 100% of the Class B Preferred Shares and 100% of the Class A Notes and Class B Notes.

In November 2009, upon the settlement of the Intel litigation (discussed in the “Legal Settlements” section, below) and the execution of a patent cross license agreement between us and Intel, the requirements satisfying the Reconciliation Event were met. As a result, GF’s Class A and Class B Preferred Shares vote on an as converted basis with any outstanding GF Ordinary Shares.

Class B Preferred Shares.    GF’s Class B Preferred Shares rank senior in right of payment to all other classes or series of equity securities of GF for purposes of dividends, distributions and upon a liquidation, dissolution or winding up of GF (Liquidation Event). Each Class B Preferred Share is deemed to accrete in value at a rate of 12% per year, compounded semiannually, of the initial purchase price per such share. The accreted value accrues daily from the Closing and is taken into account upon certain distributions to the holders of Class B Preferred Shares or upon conversion of the Class B Preferred Shares. Upon a Liquidation Event, each Class B Preferred Share will be entitled to receive, prior to any distribution to the holders of any other classes or series of equity securities, an amount equal to its accreted value. Each Class B Preferred Share is convertible, at the option of the holder thereof, into Class B Ordinary Shares at the then applicable Class B Conversion Rate. Each Class B Preferred Share will also automatically convert into Class B Ordinary Shares at the then applicable Class B Conversion Rate upon the earlier of (i) an initial public offering of GF (IPO) or (ii) a change of control transaction of GF. The initial Class B Conversion Rate is 100 Class B Ordinary Shares for each Class B Preferred Share converted, subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments. The Class B Preferred Shares currently vote on an as-converted basis with any outstanding Ordinary Shares, voting together as a single class, with respect to any question upon which holders of Ordinary Shares have the right to vote.

Class A Preferred Shares.    GF’s Class A Preferred Shares rank senior in right of payment to the Ordinary Shares of GF and junior in right of payment to the Class B Preferred Shares for purposes of dividends, distributions and upon a Liquidation Event. The Class A Preferred Shares are not entitled to any dividend or pre-determined accretion in value. Upon a Liquidation Event, each Class A Preferred Share will be entitled to receive, after the distribution to the holders of the Class B Preferred Shares but prior to any distribution to the holders of Ordinary Shares, out of any remaining assets of GF, an amount equal to the initial purchase price per share of the Class A Preferred Shares. Each Class A Preferred Share is convertible, at the option of the holder, into Class B Ordinary Shares at the then applicable Class A Conversion Rate. Each Class A Preferred Share will also automatically convert into Class B Ordinary Shares at the then applicable Class A Conversion Rate upon the earlier of (i) an IPO or (ii) a change of control transaction of GF. The initial Class A Conversion Rate is 100 Class B Ordinary Shares for each Class A Preferred Share, subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments. The Class A Preferred Shares currently vote on an as-converted basis with any outstanding Ordinary Shares, voting together as a single class, with respect to any question upon which holders of Ordinary Shares have the right to vote.

Class A Subordinated Convertible Notes.    GF’s Class A Notes accrue interest at a rate of 4% per annum, compounded semiannually. Interest on the Class A Notes is payable semiannually in additional Class A Notes. The Class A Notes are the unsecured obligations of GF and rank subordinated in right of payment to any current or future senior indebtedness of GF. The Class A Notes are not redeemable by GF without the note holder’s

41

Table of Contents

consent. The Class A Notes are convertible, in whole or in part, in multiples of $1,000, into GF Class A Preferred Shares at the option of the holder at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date based on the conversion ratio in effect on the date of conversion. The Class A Notes mature ten years from the date of issuance. However, they automatically convert into Class A Preferred Shares upon the earlier of (i) an IPO, (ii) certain change of control transactions of GF or (iii) the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date.

Class B Subordinated Convertible Notes.    GF’s Class B Notes accrue interest at a rate of 11% per annum, compounded semiannually. Interest on the Class B Notes is payable semiannually in additional Class B Notes. The Class B Notes are the unsecured obligations of GF and rank subordinated in right of payment to any current or future senior indebtedness of GF. The Class B Notes are not redeemable by GF without the note holder’s consent. The Class B Notes are convertible, in whole or in part, in multiples of $1,000, into GF Class B Preferred Shares at the option of the holder at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date at the conversion ratio in effect on the date of conversion. The Class B Notes mature ten years from the date of issuance. However, they automatically convert into GF Class B Preferred Shares upon the earlier of (i) an IPO, (ii) certain change of control transactions of GF or (iii) the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date.

Based on the structure of the transaction and the guidance on accounting for interests in variable interest entities, during 2009, GF was deemed a variable-interest entity, and we were deemed to be the primary beneficiary. Therefore, we were required to consolidate the accounts of GF from March 2, 2009 through December 26, 2009. For this period, ATIC’s noncontrolling interest, represented by its equity interests in GF, was presented outside of stockholders’ equity in the consolidated balance sheet due to ATIC’s right to put those securities back to us in the event of a change of control of AMD during the two years following the date of the Closing. Our net income attributable to common stockholders per share consists of our consolidated net income, as adjusted for (i) the portion of GF’s losses attributable to ATIC, which is based on ATIC’s proportional ownership interest in GF’s Class A Preferred Shares (17% in 2009), and (ii) the non-cash accretion on GF’s Class B Preferred Shares attributable to us, based on our proportional ownership interest of GF’s Class A Preferred Shares (83% in 2009).

At the Closing, we, ATIC and GF also entered into a Shareholders’ Agreement (the Shareholders’ Agreement), a Funding Agreement (the Funding Agreement), and a Wafer Supply Agreement (the Wafer Supply Agreement), certain terms of which are summarized below.

Shareholders’ Agreement.    The Shareholders’ Agreement sets forth the rights and obligations of AMD and ATIC as shareholders of GF. The initial GF board of directors (GF Board) consisted of eight directors, and AMD and ATIC each designated four directors. After the Reconciliation Event (discussed above), the number of directors a GF shareholder may designate increases or decreases according to the percentage of GF’s shares it owns on a fully diluted basis. We had the right to designate three directors to the GF Board as of December 26, 2009. Pursuant to the Shareholders’ Agreement, if a change of control of AMD occurs within two years of Closing, ATIC will have the right to put any or all GF securities (valued at their fair market value) held by ATIC and its permitted transferees to us in exchange for cash. In addition, if a change of control of AMD occurs after the Reconciliation Event, ATIC will have the option to purchase in cash any or all of the GF securities (valued at their fair market value) held by us and our permitted transferees, ATIC can require us or the other party to the change in control transaction to assume a pro-rata portion of ATIC’s funding commitment under the Funding Agreement until 2013, and ATIC can require the other party to the change in control transaction to guarantee all of our obligations under the transaction documents.

Funding Agreement.    The Funding Agreement provides for the funding of GF and governs the terms and conditions under which ATIC is obligated to provide such funding. Pursuant to the Funding Agreement, ATIC has committed to additional equity funding of a minimum of $3.6 billion and up to $6.0 billion to be provided in phases over five years from the Closing. The aggregate amount of equity funding to be provided by the

42

Table of Contents

shareholders in any year depends on the time period of such funding and the amounts set forth in the five-year capital plan of GF. In addition, GF is required to obtain specified third-party debt in any given year, as set forth in its five-year capital plan. To the extent that GF obtains more than the specified amount of third-party debt, ATIC is able to reduce its funding commitment accordingly. We have the right, but not the obligation, to provide additional future capital to GF in an amount pro rata to our interest in the fully converted Ordinary Shares of GF. To the extent we choose not to participate in an equity financing of GF, ATIC is obligated to purchase our share of GF securities, subject to ATIC’s funding commitments under the Funding Agreement.

ATIC’s obligations to provide funding are subject to certain conditions, including the accuracy of GF’s representations and warranties in the Funding Agreement, the absence of a material adverse effect on GF or us and the absence of a material breach or default by GF or us under the provisions of any transaction document. There are additional funding conditions for each of the phases which are set forth in more detail in the Funding Agreement.

During 2009, pursuant to a funding request from GF in accordance with the Funding Agreement, ATIC contributed $260 million of cash to GF in exchange for GF securities consisting of $52 million aggregate principal amount of Class A Notes and $208 million aggregate principal amount of Class B Notes. We declined to participate in the funding. As of December 26, 2009, our ownership interest in GF (on a fully converted to Ordinary Shares basis) was approximately 32%.

Wafer Supply Agreement.    The Wafer Supply Agreement governs the terms by which we purchase products manufactured by GF. Pursuant to the Wafer Supply Agreement, we purchase substantially all of our microprocessor unit (MPU) product requirements from GF. We currently pay GF for wafers on a cost-plus basis. If we acquire a third-party business that manufactures MPU products, we will have up to two years to transition the manufacture of such MPU products to GF. In addition, once GF establishes certain specific qualified processes for bulk silicon wafers, we will purchase from GF, where competitive, specified percentages of our GPU requirements. At our request, GF will also provide sort services to us on a product-by-product basis.

We will provide GF with binding product forecasts of our MPU and GPU product requirements. The price for GPU products will be determined by the parties when GF is able to begin manufacturing GPU products for us.

The Wafer Supply Agreement is in effect through March 2, 2024. However, the Wafer Supply Agreement may be terminated if a business plan deadlock occurs because we or ATIC, as the shareholders of GF, are unable to agree on GF’s annual business plan and ATIC elects to enter into a transition period pursuant to the Funding Agreement. GF has agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to assist us to transition the supply of products to another provider, and to continue to fulfill purchase orders for up to two years following the termination or expiration of the Wafer Supply Agreement. During the transition period, pricing for microprocessor products will remain as set forth in the Wafer Supply Agreement, but our purchase commitments to GF will no longer apply.

Governance Changes, Funding and Accounting in 2010

Deconsolidation of GF

On December 18, 2009, ATIC International Investment Company (ATIC II) acquired Chartered Semiconductor Manufacturing Ltd. (Chartered). On December 28, 2009, with our consent, ATIC II, Chartered and GF entered into a Management and Operating Agreement (MOA), which provided for the joint management and operation of GF and Chartered, thereby allowing GF and Chartered to share costs, take advantage of operating synergies and market wafer fabrications services on a collective basis. In order to allow for the signing of the MOA on December 28, 2009, prior to obtaining any regulatory approvals, we agreed to irrevocably waive rights under the Shareholders Agreement with respect to certain matters that require unanimous GF Board approval. Additionally, if any such matters come before the GF Board, we agreed that our designated GF

43

Table of Contents

directors will vote in the same manner as the majority of ATIC-designated GF Board members voting on any such matters. As a result of waiving such approval rights, as of December 28, 2009, for financial reporting purposes we no longer shared control with ATIC over GF. Based on our fully diluted ownership interest in GF, we had the right to designate two directors to the GF Board of Directors as of December 25, 2010.

In June 2009, the FASB issued an amendment to improve financial reporting by enterprises involved with variable interest entities. This new guidance became effective for us beginning the first day of 2010. Under the new guidance, the investor who is deemed to both (i) have the power to direct the activities of the variable interest entity that most significantly impact the variable interest entity’s economic performance and (ii) be exposed to losses and returns will be the primary beneficiary who should then consolidate the variable interest entity. We evaluated whether the governance changes described above would, pursuant to the new guidance, affect our consolidation of GF. We considered the purpose and design of GF, the activities of GF that most significantly affect the economic performance of GF and the concept of “who has the power,” as contemplated by the new guidance. Based on the results of this evaluation and in light of the governance changes whereby we believe we only had protective rights relative to the operations of GF, we concluded that the other investor in GF, ATIC, is the party who has the power to direct the activities of GF that most significantly impact GF’s performance and is, therefore, the primary beneficiary of GF. Accordingly, effective as of December 27, 2009, we deconsolidated GF and started accounting for our ownership interest in GF under the equity method of accounting. For purposes of our application of the equity method of accounting during 2010, we recorded our share of GF’s results, excluding the results of Chartered because GF did not have an equity ownership interest in Chartered. The terms of the Funding Agreement and the Wafer Supply Agreement described above were not affected by the deconsolidation of GF. Following the deconsolidation, GF became our related party. Our expenses related to GF’s wafer manufacturing were $1.2 billion and related to GF’s research and development activities were $114 million for the year ended December 25, 2010.

Funding of GF

Pursuant to each GF funding request from the beginning of 2010 through November 17, 2010, the equity securities issued by GF consisted of 20% of Class A Preferred Shares and 80% of Class B Preferred Shares. On November 24, 2010, we, ATIC and GF signed a letter agreement regarding fundings of GF. Pursuant to this letter agreement, the parties agreed that the securities to be issued in consideration of any future GF funding would consist solely of GF’s Class A Preferred Shares. In addition, the purchase price per Class A Preferred Share would be determined by dividing GF’s net tangible assets (derived from its most recent fiscal year-end audited consolidated balance sheet) by GF’s total number of outstanding preferred shares (assuming the conversion of any outstanding GF Class A Notes into Class A Preferred Shares and Class B Notes into Class B Preferred Shares) as of the date of the balance sheet referred to above and multiplying by 1.10. Prior to the letter agreement, the funding multiple was 0.90.

During 2010, ATIC contributed $930 million of cash to GF in exchange for GF securities consisting of 444,313 Class A Preferred Shares and 617,695 Class B Preferred Shares. We did not participate in the fundings. As a result, our ownership interest in GF’s Class A Preferred Shares decreased from approximately 83% as of December 26, 2009 to approximately 62% as of December 25, 2010, and our ownership interest in GF, on a fully converted to Ordinary Shares basis, was approximately 23%. These contributions resulted in an aggregate gain on issuance of new GF shares of $232 million, which we recorded as part of the equity in net loss of investee line item on our consolidated statement of operations.

GLOBALFOUNDRIES Singapore Pte. Ltd. (formerly Chartered) Contribution in Fiscal 2011

On December 27, 2010, ATIC International Investment Company LLC, an affiliate of ATIC, contributed all of the outstanding Ordinary Shares of GLOBALFOUNDRIES Singapore Pte. Ltd., a private limited company organized in Singapore (formerly Chartered), to GF in exchange for 2,808,981 newly issued Class A Preferred Shares. As a result, we amended and restated the Shareholders’ Agreement and the Funding Agreement. Subject

44

Table of Contents

to certain exceptions set forth in the Amended and Restated Shareholders’ Agreement, our right to designate one representative to the GF board of directors will continue for at least two years following the date on which our ownership in GF, on a fully converted to GF Ordinary Shares basis, falls below 10%, the point at which we previously lost the right to such board representative. Among other things, the Amended and Restated Funding Agreement incorporated the terms of the letter agreement referenced above.

The issuance of Class A Preferred Shares to ATIC International diluted our ownership interest in GF from 23% to 14% on a fully converted to GF Ordinary Shares basis and from 34% to 18% on a voting basis. Moreover, as a result of the contribution, we expect to realize a non-cash gain as a result of the dilution of our equity interest in GF, which will be reflected in our investment in GF balance during the first quarter of 2011. We cannot estimate the amount of gain at this time, but we expect it to be material.

In connection with our reduced ownership interest in GF, we were required to decrease the number of AMD-designated directors on GF’s Board from two to one. Also, in connection with the contribution and the amendments to the Shareholders’ Agreement and the Funding Agreement, we assessed our ability to exercise significant influence over GF. We considered factors such as representation on GF’s Board, participation in GF’s policy-making processes, material intra-entity transactions, interchange of managerial personnel, technological dependency, and the extent of our ownership in GF in relation to ownership by the other shareholder. Based on the results of the assessment, we concluded that as of December 27, 2010, we no longer have the ability to exercise significant influence over GF. Accordingly, effective as of December 27, 2010, we changed our method of accounting for our ownership interest in GF from the equity method to the cost method of accounting. Under the cost method of accounting, we will no longer recognize any share of GF’s net income or loss in our statement of operations.

Critical Accounting Estimates

Our discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations are based upon our consolidated financial statements, which have been prepared in accordance with U.S. GAAP. The preparation of these financial statements requires us to make estimates and judgments that affect the reported amounts in our consolidated financial statements. We base our estimates on historical experience and on various other assumptions that we believe to be reasonable under the circumstances, the results of which form the basis for making judgments about the carrying values of assets and liabilities. Although actual results have historically been reasonably consistent with management’s expectations, actual results may differ from these estimates or our estimates may be affected by different assumptions or conditions.

We believe the following critical accounting estimates are the most significant to the presentation of our financial statements and require the most difficult, subjective and complex judgments.

Revenue Allowances.    We record a provision for estimated sales returns and allowances on product sales for estimated future price reductions and other customer incentives in the same period that the related revenues are recorded. We base these estimates on actual historical sales returns, allowances, historical price reductions, market activity, and other known or anticipated trends and factors. These estimates are subject to management’s judgment, and actual provisions could be different from our estimates and current provisions, resulting in future adjustments to our revenues and operating results.

Inventory Valuation.    At each balance sheet date, we evaluate our ending inventories for excess quantities and obsolescence. This evaluation includes analysis of sales levels by product and projections of future demand. These projections assist us in determining the carrying value of our inventory and are also used for near-term factory production planning. Generally, inventories on hand in excess of forecasted demand for the next two quarters are not valued. In addition, we write off inventories that are considered obsolete. We adjust the remaining specific inventory balances to approximate the lower of our standard manufacturing cost or market value. Among other factors, management considers forecasted demand in relation to the inventory on hand,

45

Table of Contents

competitiveness of product offerings, market conditions and product life cycles when determining obsolescence and net realizable value. If, in any period, we anticipate future demand or market conditions to be less favorable than our previous estimates, additional inventory write-downs may be required and would be reflected in cost of sales in the period the revision is made. This would have a negative impact on our gross margin in that period. If in any period we are able to sell inventories that were not valued or that had been written off in a previous period, related revenues would be recorded without any offsetting charge to cost of sales, resulting in a net benefit to our gross margin in that period.

Goodwill.    Goodwill represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of net tangible and identifiable intangible assets acquired. Goodwill amounts are not amortized, but rather are tested for impairment at least annually, or more frequently if there are indicators of impairment present. We perform the annual goodwill impairment analysis as of the first day of the fourth quarter of each fiscal year. We evaluate whether goodwill has been impaired at the reporting unit level by first determining whether the estimated fair value of the reporting unit is less than its carrying value and, if so, by determining whether the implied fair value of goodwill within the reporting unit is less than the carrying value. Implied fair value of goodwill is determined by considering both the income and market approach. While market valuation data for comparable companies is gathered and analyzed, we believe that there has not been sufficient comparability between the peer groups and the specific reporting units to allow for the derivation of reliable indications of value using a market approach. Therefore, we have ultimately employed the income approach which requires estimates of future operating results and cash flows of each of the reporting units, discounted using estimated discount rates. The key assumptions we have used to determine the fair value of our reporting units includes projected cash flows for the next 10 years and discount rates ranging from 15% to 30%. Discount rates are based on our weighted average cost of capital, adjusted for the risks associated with operations. A variance in the discount rate could have a significant impact on the amount of the goodwill impairment charge recorded, if any.

Impairment of Long-Lived Assets including Acquired Intangible Assets.    We consider quarterly whether indicators of impairment of long-lived assets and intangible assets are present. These indicators may include, but are not limited to, significant decreases in the market value of an asset and significant changes in the extent or manner in which an asset is used. If these or other indicators are present, we test for recoverability of the asset by determining whether the estimated undiscounted cash flows attributable to the assets in question are less than their carrying value. If less, we recognize an impairment loss based on the excess of the carrying amount of the assets over their respective fair values. Fair value is determined by discounted future cash flows, appraisals or other methods. Significant judgment is involved in estimating future cash flows and deriving the discount rate to apply to the estimated future cash flows, and in evaluating the results of appraisals or other valuation methods. For example, in recent analyses performed, discount rates have ranged from 18% to 32%, but this may not be indicative of future analyses. If the asset determined to be impaired is to be held and used, we recognize an impairment loss through a charge to our operating results, which also reduces the carrying basis of the related asset. The new carrying value of the related asset is depreciated or amortized over the remaining estimated useful life of the asset. We also must make subjective judgments regarding the remaining useful life of the asset. We may incur additional impairment losses in future periods if factors influencing our estimates of the undiscounted cash flows change. For assets held for sale, impairment losses are measured at the lower of the carrying amount of the assets or the fair value of the assets less costs to sell. For assets to be disposed of other than by sale, impairment losses are measured as their carrying amount less salvage value, if any, at the time the assets cease to be used.

Income Taxes.    In determining taxable income for financial statement reporting purposes, we must make certain estimates and judgments. These estimates and judgments are applied in the calculation of certain tax liabilities and in the determination of the recoverability of deferred tax assets, which arise from temporary differences between the recognition of assets and liabilities for tax and financial statement reporting purposes.

We must assess the likelihood that we will be able to recover our deferred tax assets. If recovery is not likely, we must increase our charge to income tax expense, in the form of a valuation allowance, for the deferred

46

Table of Contents

tax assets that we estimate will not ultimately be recoverable. We consider past performance, future expected taxable income and prudent and feasible tax planning strategies in determining the need for a valuation allowance.

In addition, the calculation of our tax liabilities involves dealing with uncertainties in the application of complex tax rules and the potential for future adjustment of our uncertain tax positions by the Internal Revenue Service or other taxing jurisdiction. If our estimates of these taxes are greater or less than actual results, an additional tax benefit or charge will result. We recognize potential accrued interest and penalties related to unrecognized tax benefits as interest expense and income tax expense, respectively.

Results of Operations

We intend the discussion of our financial condition and results of operations that follows to provide information that will assist you in understanding our financial statements, the changes in certain key items in those financial statements from year to year, the primary factors that resulted in those changes and how certain accounting principles, policies and estimates affect our financial statements.

We review and assess operating performance using segment net revenues and operating income (loss) before interest, other income (expense), net, equity in net loss of investee and income taxes. These performance measures include the allocation of expenses to the operating segments based on management’s judgment.

In the first quarter of 2008, we reviewed and addressed operating performance using the following reportable segments:

In the second quarter of 2008, we decided to divest our Handheld and Digital Television business units, which were previously part of the Consumer Electronics segment. As a result, we classified these business units as discontinued operations in our financial statements and began reviewing and assessing operating performance using the following reportable segments:

In the fourth quarter of 2008, we determined that, based on ongoing negotiations related to the divestiture of the Handheld business unit, the discontinued operations classification criteria for this business unit were no longer met. As a result, we classified the results of the Handheld business unit back into continuing operations.

In the first quarter of 2009, as a result of the formation of GF, we began reviewing and assessing operating performance using the following reportable segments:

47

Table of Contents

In addition to these reportable segments, we had an All Other category, which was not a reportable segment. This category included certain expenses and credits that were not allocated to any of the operating segments because management did not consider these expenses and credits in evaluating the performance of the operating segments. These expenses were non-Foundry segment related expenses and included impairment of goodwill and acquired intangible assets, employee stock-based compensation expense, restructuring charges and amortization of acquired intangible assets. We also reported the results of the Handheld business unit in the All Other category because the operating results of this business unit were not material. The Handheld business unit consisted of the AMD Imageon™ media processor brand and handheld products that were part of the Handheld business unit prior to the sale of certain graphics and multimedia technology assets and intellectual property to Qualcomm Incorporated (Qualcomm) during the first quarter of 2009. We also had an Intersegment Eliminations category, which was also not a reportable segment. This category included intersegment eliminations for revenue, cost of sales and profits on inventory related to transactions between the Computing Solutions segment and the Foundry segment.

Beginning in the first quarter of 2010, as a result of the deconsolidation of GF, we no longer had a Foundry segment or an Intersegment Eliminations category. We began reviewing and assessing operating performance using the following reportable segments:

In addition, starting in the first quarter of 2010, we began accounting for the embedded graphics business under the Computing Solutions segment. Previously, operating results related to this business were recorded as part of the Graphics segment. Information for prior periods has been recast to reflect this change.

We continue to have an All Other category, as described above, and the results of the Handheld business unit continue to be reported in this category because we expect that the operating results of this business unit will continue to be immaterial.

We use a 52- to 53-week fiscal year. Our fiscal year ends on the last Saturday in December. The years ended December 25, 2010, December 26, 2009 and December 27, 2008 each included 52 weeks. References in this report to 2010, 2009 and 2008 refer to the fiscal year unless explicitly stated otherwise.

48

Table of Contents

The following table provides a summary of net revenue and operating income (loss) by segment and income (loss) from continuing operations before income taxes for 2010, 2009 and 2008. Information specific to the Foundry segment and Intersegment Eliminations for 2008 have not been recast to reflect the Foundry segment changes noted above for 2009 because it is not practicable to do so. Accordingly, 2009 information is not comparable to prior period information.

Computing Solutions

Computing Solutions net revenue of $4.8 billion in 2010 increased 16% compared to net revenue of $4.2 billion in 2009, primarily as a result of an 18% increase in unit shipments partially offset by a 2% decrease in average selling price. The increase in unit shipments was attributable to an increase in unit shipments of our microprocessor products for notebook PCs as well as chipset products, resulting primarily from an improved economic environment. In addition, chipset unit shipments increased as customers increasingly adopted AMD chipsets with our microprocessor products, while unit shipments of our microprocessors for notebook PCs increased due to increased demand from existing and new customers for our new notebook platforms. Average selling price decreased due to a decrease in average selling price of embedded processors, partially offset by an increase in average selling price of our chipsets and microprocessor products. Average selling price of embedded processors decreased due to a shift in our product mix to lower-end, legacy products. Average selling price of microprocessor products increased due to a favorable shift in our product mix to higher end microprocessors, especially for servers, as customers continued to transition to our AMD Opteron™ 6000 series server platforms. Average selling price of our chipsets products increased primarily due to a shift in product mix.

Computing Solutions net revenue of $4.2 billion in 2009 decreased 9% compared to net revenue of $4.6 billion in 2008. In 2008, Computing Solutions net revenue included $191 million in revenue from the licensing of certain manufacturing process technology to a third party, which accounted for 4% of this total. Without the effect of the process technology license revenue, Computing Solutions net revenue would have decreased 5% primarily as a result of a 16% decrease in the average selling price partially offset by a 13% increase in unit shipments. The average selling price decreased primarily due to a decrease in the average selling price of microprocessors, especially for notebook PCs, and a greater mix of chipsets, which typically have a lower

49

Table of Contents

average selling price. Competitive market conditions and the macroeconomic challenges that affected the global economy, especially in the first half of 2009, caused us to decrease the price of many of our Computing Solutions products, and also contributed to a shift in our product mix to lower end microprocessors. The increase in unit shipments was primarily attributable to an increase in demand for chipsets and microprocessors for notebooks. Chipset unit shipments increased, especially in the second half of 2009, as customers increasingly adopted AMD chipsets with our microprocessor products. Unit shipments of our microprocessors for notebooks increased, especially in the fourth quarter of 2009, due to increased demand in the overall notebook PC market, as end users increasingly demanded notebook PCs over desktop PCs.

Computing Solutions operating income was $529 million in 2010 compared to $142 million in 2009. The improvement was primarily due to the increase in net revenue referenced above and a $25 million decrease in cost of sales, partially offset by a $224 million increase in research and development expenses and a $61 million increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses. Cost of sales decreased due to reductions in manufacturing costs and a one-time benefit related to the deconsolidation of GF in 2010. Research and development expenses and marketing, general and administrative expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses,” below.

Computing Solutions operating income was $142 million in 2009 compared to an operating loss of $458 million in 2008. Operating results for 2009 are not comparable to operating results for 2008 because of the creation of the Foundry segment in the first quarter of 2009, which resulted in our reporting certain research and development and marketing, general and administrative expenses in the Foundry segment that we would previously have reported in the Computing Solutions segment. Operating loss in 2008 included a $193 million gain on the sale of 200 millimeter equipment and $191 million of process technology license revenue that did not occur in 2009.

Graphics

Graphics net revenue of $1.7 billion in 2010 increased 43% compared to net revenue of $1.2 billion in 2009. The increase was due to a 49% increase in net revenue from sales of GPU products. Net revenue from sales of GPU products increased primarily due to an increase in both GPU unit shipments and average selling price. Unit shipments increased due to strong demand for our DX 11—ATI Radeon™ products. However, the increase was limited by supply constraints primarily related to constrained wafer foundry capacity in the first half of 2010. Supply constraints improved in the third quarter of 2010, and we did not experience any supply constraints during the fourth quarter of 2010. GPU average selling price increased due to a favorable shift in our product mix to higher end GPU products.

Graphics net revenue of $1.2 billion in 2009 increased 3% compared to net revenue of $1.1 billion in 2008. The increase was due to a 5% increase in revenue from the sale of GPU products partially offset by a 3% decrease in royalty revenue received in connection with sales of game console systems that incorporate our graphics technology. Revenue from the sale of GPU products increased due to an increase in GPU unit shipments partially offset by a decrease in GPU average selling price. GPU unit shipments increased primarily due to an increase in demand for our graphics products, especially our 40nm ATI Radeon HD 5000 series of products, which we introduced in September 2009. We believe that the increase in GPU unit shipments was limited as a result of supply constraints with respect to our next generation GPUs. GPU average selling price decreased due to competitive pricing pressure and a shift in our product mix to more value-priced GPUs. However, the decline in GPU average selling price that we experienced during the first three quarters of 2009 was mitigated by improved GPU average selling price in the fourth quarter of 2009 primarily due to sales of our higher priced ATI Radeon HD 5000 series of products. Royalty revenue decreased primarily due to decreased demand for the latest generation of game consoles in light of the macroeconomic environment in the first half of 2009.

Graphics operating income was $149 million in 2010 compared to $35 million in 2009. The improvement was primarily due to the increase in net revenue referenced above, partially offset by a $345 million increase in

50

Table of Contents

cost of sales due to higher GPU unit shipments, a $22 million increase in research and development expenses and a $15 million increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses. Research and development expenses and marketing, general and administrative expenses increased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses,” below.

Graphics operating income was $35 million in 2009 compared to operating income of $9 million 2008. The increase in operating results was primarily due to a $41 million increase in net revenue described above and a $29 million decrease in marketing, general and administrative expenses due to a reduction in discretionary spending. These were partially offset by a $29 million increase in cost of sales because of higher GPU unit shipments.

Foundry

Foundry net revenue was $1.1 billion in 2009. Foundry operating loss was $433 million in 2009. In 2010 and 2008, we did not have a Foundry segment.

All Other

All Other net revenue of $14 million in 2010 decreased by 79% compared to net revenue of $66 million in 2009. All Other net revenue decreased because of a significant reduction in customer orders for Handheld products. Customer orders decreased as we continued to exit this business.

All Other net revenue of $66 million in 2009 decreased 21% compared to $85 million in 2008. All Other net revenue decreased because we no longer developed new Handheld products, and we experienced reduced customer orders in 2009. We decided to exit the Handheld business after selling certain graphics and multimedia technology assets and intellectual property to Qualcomm in the first quarter of 2009.

All Other operating income in 2010 was $170 million compared to $968 million in 2009. The decrease in operating results was primarily attributable to an absence of $1.2 billion of income from the settlement of our litigation with Intel in the fourth quarter of 2009 and the decrease in revenue referenced above, partially offset by $283 million of income from the settlement of our litigation with Samsung in the fourth quarter of 2010, a $77 million decrease in cost of sales, an absence of $65 million in restructuring charges, a $38 million decrease in research and development expenses, a $21 million decrease in marketing, general and administrative expenses and a $9 million decrease in amortization due to certain fully amortized acquired intangible assets. Cost of sales decreased primarily due to a one-time benefit recognized in the first quarter of 2010 related to the deconsolidation of GF and lower Handheld product unit shipments. Research and development expenses and marketing, general and administrative expenses decreased for the reasons set forth under “Expenses,” below.

All Other operating income of $968 million in 2009 increased by $2.5 billion compared to an operating loss of $1.5 billion in 2008. The improvement in operating results was primarily attributable to $1.242 billion of income from the settlement of our litigation with Intel in the fourth quarter of 2009. Additionally, in 2008, we had a $1.1 billion impairment charge, which included a goodwill write-down of $1.0 billion and a write-down of specific intangible assets of $130 million. There were no corresponding charges in 2009. The improvement was also impacted by a $67 million decrease in amortization of acquired intangible assets due to the write-down of certain intangible assets in 2008 and a $25 million decrease in restructuring charges.

Intersegment Eliminations

Intersegment eliminations represent eliminations during consolidation in revenue and in cost of sales and profits on inventory between the Computing Solutions segment and the Foundry segment. For 2009, intersegment eliminations of revenue were $1.1 billion and intersegment eliminations of cost of sales and profits on inventory were $48 million. Prior to the first quarter of 2009 and in 2010, we did not have an Intersegment Eliminations category and, therefore, the results of operations in 2009 for that category are not comparable to 2010 and 2008.

51

Table of Contents

Comparison of Gross Margin, Expenses, Interest Income, Interest Expense, Other Income (Expense), Net, Income Taxes and Equity in Net Loss of Investee

The following is a summary of certain consolidated statement of operations data for 2010, 2009 and 2008.

Gross Margin

Gross margin as a percentage of net revenue was 46% in 2010 compared to 42% in 2009. Gross margin in 2010 included the $69 million benefit related to the deconsolidation impact of GF. Gross margin in 2009 included $159 million attributable to the Foundry segment and Intersegment Eliminations related to profits on inventory and a $171 million benefit related to the sale of inventory that had been written-down in the fourth quarter of 2008. The factors that led to the sale of the inventory that was previously written down were the stabilization of the overall macroeconomic environment and improved business conditions in 2009 compared to the end of 2008, which led to an increase in end-user demand for PCs and, correspondingly, an increase in customer orders for, and shipments of, our products.

Absent the effects of the events described above, which we believe are not indicative of our ongoing operating performance, our gross margin would have been 45% in 2010 compared to 36% in 2009. The improvement in gross margin, as adjusted for the factors described above, was primarily attributable to an improvement in our manufacturing costs, including our utilization of GF’s manufacturing facilities, and higher average selling price for microprocessors and GPUs due to a favorable shift in product mix.

Gross margin as a percentage of net revenue was 42% in 2009 compared to 40% in 2008. Gross margin in 2009 included a $171 million, or 3%, benefit related to the sale of inventory that had been written-down in the fourth quarter of 2008. Gross margin in 2008 included a $191 million, or 2%, benefit from process technology license revenue recorded in our Computing Solutions segment and a $227 million, or 4%, negative impact from an incremental write-down of inventory. Without the effect of the above events in 2009 and 2008, which we believe gives a more comparable view of these periods, gross margin would have been 39% in 2009 compared to 42% in 2008. Gross margin in the first half of 2009 was adversely impacted by depressed average selling price and the under-utilization of GF’s manufacturing facilities as a result of reduced demand for our microprocessor products. However, the adverse impact of these factors on 2009 gross margin was partially mitigated by developments during the second half of 2009, including improvements in utilization of GF’s manufacturing facilities and an improvement in our unit costs primarily due to an increase in unit shipments of microprocessors manufactured using 45nm process technology.

52

Table of Contents

During 2009 and 2008, we recorded grants and allowances received from the State of Saxony and the Federal Republic of Germany in connection with the manufacturing facilities in Dresden, Germany as long-term liabilities on our consolidated financial statements. We amortized these amounts as they were earned as a reduction to operating expenses. The amortization of the production related grants and allowances was recorded as a credit to cost of sales. The credit to cost of sales totaled $46 million in 2009 and $86 million in 2008. The fluctuations in the recognition of these credits did not significantly impact our consolidated gross margins. With the deconsolidation of GF as of the beginning of 2010, our consolidated financial statements no longer directly reflected such credits to cost of sales. However, these credits had a favorable impact on the amounts that we paid GF pursuant to the Wafer Supply Agreement.

Expenses

Research and Development Expenses

Research and development expenses of $1.4 billion in 2010, decreased by $316 million, or 18%, compared to $1.7 billion in 2009. In 2009, research and development expenses included $524 million in research and development expenses related to the Foundry segment. Without taking into account the research and development expenses attributable to the Foundry segment, which are not indicative of our ongoing performance, research and development expenses would have increased by $208 million in 2010 as compared to 2009. This increase was due to a $224 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Computing Solutions segment and a $22 million increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Graphics segment, partially offset by a $38 million decrease in research and development expenses attributable to our All Other category. The increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Computing Solutions segment was primarily due to a $91 million increase in product engineering and design costs for our future products, a $68 million increase in employee benefit and compensation expense and a $64 million increase in manufacturing process technology expenses related to GF for our future products. The increase in research and development expenses attributable to our Graphics segment was primarily due to a $33 million increase in employee benefit and compensation expense, partially offset by a $13 million decrease in product engineering and design costs due to lower material costs used in 2010. The decrease in research and development expenses attributable to our All Other category was primarily because of lower research and development expenses related to handheld products because we no longer develop these products.

Research and development expenses decreased $127 million, or 7%, from $1.8 billion in 2008 to $1.7 billion in 2009. This decrease was primarily due to a $193 million decrease in product engineering and design costs, which reflected our efforts to reduce operating expenses, and was partially offset by a $62 million increase in manufacturing process technology expenses mainly incurred by GF.

In 2009, GF applied for subsidies relating to certain research and development projects, and in 2008 we applied for these subsidies. We recorded these research and development subsidies in our consolidated financial statements as a reduction of research and development expenses when all conditions and requirements set forth in the subsidy allowance were met. The credit to research and development expenses was $46 million in 2009 and $36 million in 2008. With the deconsolidation of GF in 2010, we no longer record these credits in our consolidated financial statements.

Marketing, General and Administrative Expenses

Marketing, general and administrative expenses of $934 million in 2010, decreased by $60 million, or 6%, compared to $994 million in 2009. Marketing, general and administrative expenses in 2009 included $116 million attributable to the Foundry segment. Without taking into account the marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to the Foundry segment, which are not indicative of our ongoing performance, marketing, general and administrative expenses would have increased by $56 million. This increase was due to a $61 million increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to our

53

Table of Contents

Computing Solutions segment and a $15 million increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to our Graphics segment, partially offset by a $21 million decrease in general and administrative expenses attributable to our All Other category. The increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses in our Computing Solutions segment was primarily due to a $101 million increase in sales and marketing activities, a $26 million increase in employee benefit and compensation expenses, a $15 million increase in labor expenses and a $7 million increase in other general and administrative expenses. These increases were partially offset by an $88 million decrease in legal expenses following our settlement with Intel in 2009. The increase in marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to our Graphics segment was primarily due to a $15 million increase in employee benefit and compensation expenses and other general and administrative expenses. The decrease in marketing, general and administrative expenses attributable to the All Other category was mainly due to the absence of $21 million of expenses incurred in connection with the formation of GF in the first quarter of 2009.

Marketing, general and administrative expenses decreased $310 million or 24%, from $1.3 billion in 2008 to $994 million in 2009. This decrease was primarily due to a $216 million decrease in cooperative advertising programs due to decreased sales and cost reduction activities, a $99 million decrease in corporate sales and marketing expenses due to our cost cutting efforts and a $16 million decrease in other administrative expenses.

Legal Settlements

Samsung Settlement

On December 22, 2010, we entered into a Patent License and Settlement Agreement with Samsung to end all outstanding legal disputes related to pending patent litigation between us and Samsung. Pursuant to this agreement, all claims between the parties were dismissed with prejudice and Samsung agreed to pay us $283 million less any withholding taxes. We received the first payment of $119 million (which represents $143 million less withholding taxes) in December 2010. The remaining amount of $117 million (which represents $140 million less withholding taxes) will be paid in two equal installments by May 31, 2011 and by November 30, 2011. In addition, pursuant to the settlement agreement, Samsung granted to us, and we granted to Samsung, non-exclusive, royalty-free licenses to all patents and patent applications for ten years after the effective date of the Agreement to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise dispose of certain semiconductor- and electronic-related products anywhere in the world.

This settlement encompasses all patent litigation and disputes between the parties, and we do not have any future obligations that we are required to perform in order to earn this settlement payment. Accordingly, we recognized the entire settlement amount in our 2010 operating results.

Intel Settlement

On November 12, 2009, we entered into an agreement with Intel to end all outstanding legal disputes between us and Intel including antitrust litigation and patent cross license disputes. Under the terms of the agreement:

54

Table of Contents

This settlement encompasses all past antitrust litigation between us and Intel and disputes and there are no future obligations that we need to perform to earn this settlement payment. That is, the patent cross license agreement represents fully paid up licenses by both AMD and Intel for which no future payments or delivery is required. Accordingly, we recognized the entire settlement amount in our 2009 operating results.

Amortization of Acquired Intangible Assets and Impairment of Goodwill and Acquired Intangible Assets

Amortization of Acquired Intangible Assets

Amortization of acquired intangible assets decreased $9 million, or 13%, from $70 million in 2009 to $61 million in 2010. This decrease was due to the reduced amortization base amount of the acquired intangible assets.

Amortization of acquired intangible assets decreased $67 million, or 49%, from $137 million in 2008 to $70 million in 2009. This decrease was due to the write-down of certain acquired intangible assets as a result of the 2008 impairment analyses.

Impairment of Goodwill and Acquired Intangible Assets

2010 and 2009 Impairment Analyses

In the fourth quarters of 2010 and 2009, we conducted our annual impairment tests of goodwill. We considered the income and market approaches in determining the implied fair value of the goodwill. The income approach required estimates of future operating results and cash flows of each of the reporting units discounted using estimated discount rates of 22% in 2010 and from 15% to 18% in 2009. Based on the results of our annual analysis of goodwill in 2010 and 2009, the fair values exceeded the carrying values by a significant amount (Step 1), indicating that there was no goodwill impairment. As of December 25, 2010 and December 26, 2009, we did not have any reporting units that were at risk of failing Step 1 of the goodwill impairment test.

2008 Impairment Analyses

During 2008, we concluded that the carrying amount of goodwill associated with our Handheld business unit was impaired and recorded an impairment charge of $336 million. In addition, we concluded that the carrying amounts of goodwill assigned to the Graphics and Computing Solutions segments exceeded their implied fair values and recorded impairment charges of $161 million and $461 million, respectively. We considered the income and market approaches in determining the implied fair value of the goodwill. The income approach required estimates of future operating results and cash flows of each of the reporting units discounted using applicable estimated discount rates ranging from 19% to 30%.

The conclusion regarding goodwill impairment was also due to the deterioration in the price of our common stock and the resulting reduced market capitalization. We included the impairment charges in the caption “Impairment of goodwill and acquired intangible assets” in our 2008 consolidated statement of operations.

We further concluded that the carrying amount of goodwill associated with our Digital Television business unit was impaired and recorded impairment charges of $473 million related to the Digital Television (DTV) business unit, which is included in the caption “Loss from discontinued operations, net of tax” in our 2008 consolidated statement of operations. The assumptions used for the assessment of the DTV business unit were consistent with those used for the Handheld business unit described above.

The outcome of our 2008 goodwill impairment analyses indicated that the carrying amount of certain acquisition-related intangible assets or asset groups may not be recoverable. We assessed the recoverability of the acquisition-related intangible assets or asset groups, as appropriate, by determining whether the unamortized balances could be recovered through undiscounted future net cash flows. We determined that certain of the acquisition-related intangible assets associated with our Computing Solutions and Graphics segments and our

55

Table of Contents

Handheld business unit were impaired primarily due to the revised lower revenue forecasts associated with the products incorporating the developed product technology, the customer relationships, and the trademarks and trade names. We measured the amount of impairment by calculating the amount by which the carrying value of the assets exceeded their estimated fair values, which were based on projected discounted future net cash flows. As a result of these impairment analyses, we recorded an impairment charge of approximately $130 million, which is included in the caption “Impairment of goodwill and acquired intangible assets” in our 2008 consolidated statement of operations.

Gain on sale of 200 millimeter equipment and the license of related process technology

During 2008, in conjunction with the conversion of Fab 30, our former manufacturing facility in Dresden, Germany, from 200 millimeter to 300 millimeter fabrication, we sold certain 200 millimeter manufacturing equipment and licensed certain process technology to a third party. We evaluated this multiple-element arrangement and determined that each component was considered a separate unit of accounting. In addition, the transaction consideration was allocated to each unit based on their relative fair values.

Based on the evaluation, we recognized a gain of approximately $167 million on the equipment sale, and a $191 million gain on the license of process technology. The difference between the $167 million gain recognized in the transaction described above and the $193 million gain shown in the consolidated statement of operations for 2008 represents gains recognized on sales of 200 millimeter equipment to other third parties.

Effects of Restructuring Plans

In the second and fourth quarters of 2008, we initiated restructuring plans to reduce our cost structure. Both plans primarily involved the termination of employees. The restructuring charges recorded in conjunction with the plans initiated during 2008 primarily represented severance and costs related to the continuation of certain employee benefits, contract or program termination costs, asset impairments and exit costs for facility consolidations and closures. The remaining liability for these plans is related to lease obligations that will be paid through 2012. We anticipate cash payments related to the remaining liability for the 2008 restructuring plans to be $3.5 million in 2011 and $3.5 million in 2012. In December 2002, we initiated a restructuring plan. As of December 25, 2010, the 2008 and 2002 plans are substantially completed.

The following table provides a summary of each major type of cost associated with the 2008 and 2002 restructuring plans for the periods presented:

Interest Income

Interest income of $11 million in 2010 decreased by $5 million from $16 million in 2009, primarily due to the absence of $4 million representing GF interest income, which is not reflected in our results of operations in 2010 as a result of the deconsolidation of GF.

Interest income of $16 million in 2009 decreased from $39 million in 2008, primarily due to a 66% decrease in weighted-average interest rates during 2009 compared to 2008, partially offset by an increase in average cash balances during 2009.

56

Table of Contents

Interest Expense

Total interest charges of $199 million in 2010 decreased by $240 million from $439 million in 2009. Interest expense decreased, primarily due to the absence, as a result of the deconsolidation of GF, of $153 million of interest expense incurred by GF in 2009 and a net reduction in the principal amount of our outstanding debt, which resulted in a net decrease of $77 million in interest expense.

Total interest charges of $439 million in 2009 increased by $39 million from $400 million in 2008, primarily due to GF’s issuance of Class A Notes and Class B Notes to ATIC on March 2, 2009, which resulted in $92 million of interest expense in 2009. The increase was partially offset by a decrease of interest expense due to a lower principal amount outstanding under the 700 million euro Term Loan Facility Agreement related to the Dresden manufacturing facilities and our 6.00% Notes due to repurchases occurring in the second and third quarters of 2009. During 2008, we had capitalized interest primarily in connection with the construction of the Fab 36 wafer fabrication facility and equipment facilitization activities in Dresden, Germany. We discontinued capitalizing interest for Fab 36 in the first quarter of 2008 when it was in full production. There was $1 million of interest capitalized in 2009 related to GF’s construction of Fab 2, its semiconductor facility in Saratoga County, New York.

Other Income (Expense), Net

Other income, net in 2010 was $311 million compared to $166 million of other income, net in 2009 and $37 million of other expense, net in 2008.

In 2010, we recognized a one-time, non-cash gain related to the deconsolidation of GF of approximately $325 million, a $17 million gain from the sale of our marketable securities and an $8 million gain related to an earn-out payment that we received in connection with the acquisition of a company that we had invested in, partially offset by a $24 million loss related to our repurchase of $1,016 million principal amount of our 6.00% Notes and $14 million loss due to foreign exchange rate fluctuations.

In 2009, we repurchased $344 million principal amount of our 6.00% Notes, resulting in a gain of $174 million, and we repurchased $1,015 million principal amount of our 5.75% Notes, resulting in a gain of $6 million. In addition, we recognized a gain of $15 million on settlement of a liability related to certain foreign currency exchange contracts, a gain of $28 million on the sale of certain Handheld assets, and a $25 million gain from a class action legal settlement with DRAM manufacturers. These gains were partially offset by a $27 million foreign exchange loss, a $17 million charge for real estate transfer taxes in connection with the GF manufacturing joint venture transaction and a $10 million charge related to the AMTC joint venture. During 2009, we also redeemed the remaining outstanding principal amount of our 7.75% Notes resulting in a net loss of $11 million and recorded other than temporary impairment charge of $3 million relating to our investment in Spansion Inc.

In 2008, we recorded a $53 million other than temporary impairment charge related to our investment in Spansion Inc. and a $24 million other than temporary impairment charge related to our portfolio of auction rate securities (ARS). These charges were partially offset by a $33 million gain related to the repurchase of $60 million principal amount of our 6.00% Notes for approximately $20 million in cash and a gain of $11 million on acquiring the put option related to our holdings of UBS ARS, representing the fair value of this financial instrument.

57

Table of Contents

Income Taxes

We recorded an income tax provision of $38 million in 2010, $112 million in 2009 and $68 million in 2008.

The income tax provision in 2010 was primarily due to withholding taxes paid to the Korean tax authorities in connection with the payment we received from Samsung in December 2010 pursuant to the Patent License and Settlement Agreement as well as foreign taxes in profitable locations offset by benefits including the monetization of U.S. research and development credits, an alternative minimum tax refund on net operating loss carryback in the United States and the reversal of unrecognized tax benefits in foreign jurisdictions.

The income tax provision in 2009 was primarily due to a one-time loss of deferred tax assets for German net operating loss carryovers upon transfer of our ownership interests in the Dresden subsidiaries to GF plus foreign taxes in profitable locations offset by discrete tax benefits, including the monetization of U.S. research and development credits.

The income tax provision in 2008 primarily resulted from increases in net deferred tax liabilities in our former German subsidiaries reduced by net current tax benefits in other jurisdictions.

As of December 25, 2010, substantially all of our U.S. and foreign deferred tax assets, net of deferred tax liabilities, continued to be subject to a valuation allowance. The realization of these assets is dependent on substantial future taxable income which, at December 25, 2010, in management’s estimate, is not more likely than not to be achieved.

Equity in Net Loss of Investee

During the time that we applied the equity method of accounting for our ownership interest in GF, our equity in net loss of investee primarily consisted of our proportionate share of GF’s losses for the period based on our ownership percentage of GF’s Class A Preferred Shares, our portion of the non-cash accretion on GF’s Class B Preferred Shares, the elimination of intercompany profit, reflecting the mark-up on inventory that remained on our consolidated balance sheet at the end of the period, the amortization of basis differences identified from the purchase price allocation process, based on the fair value of GF upon deconsolidation and, to the extent applicable, the gain or loss on dilution of our ownership interest as a result of the capital infusion into GF by ATIC.

Stock-Based Compensation Expense

Stock-based compensation expense related to employee stock options, restricted stock and restricted stock units for the years ended December 25, 2010, December 26, 2009 and December 27, 2008 was allocated in our consolidated statements of operations as follows:

During 2010, 2009, and 2008, we did not realize any excess tax benefits related to stock-based compensation and therefore we did not record any related financing cash flows.

Stock-based compensation expenses of $87 million in 2010 increased $12 million compared to $75 million in 2009. This increase was primarily due to a higher average grant date fair value in 2010 as compared to 2009.

58

Table of Contents

Stock-based compensation expenses of $75 million in 2009 decreased $2 million compared to $77 million in 2008. This decrease was primarily a result of: (i) a cumulative catch up adjustment of expenses to reflect the effect of applying a higher forfeiture rate retrospectively in 2009; (ii) a lower average grant date fair value in 2009 as compared to 2008, and (iii) the forfeiture of certain stock option and RSU grants from employees transferring to GF. The decreases were substantially offset by the charges associated with the accelerated vesting of stock awards upon the retirement of our former Executive Chairman and Chairman of the Board in 2009.

In 2010 and 2009, we did not have employee stock-based compensation expense for discontinued operations. For the year ended December 27, 2008, employee stock-based compensation expense included in discontinued operations and excluded from continuing operations was $2 million.

As of December 25, 2010, we had $19 million of total unrecognized compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures, related to stock options that will be recognized over the weighted average period of 1.71 years. Also, as of December 25, 2010, we had $99 million of total unrecognized compensation expense, net of estimated forfeitures, related to restricted stock and restricted stock units that will be recognized over the weighted average period of 1.93 years.

International Sales

International sales as a percentage of net revenue were 88% in 2010, 87% in 2009 and 88% in 2008. We expect that international sales will continue to be a significant portion of total sales in the foreseeable future. Substantially all of our sales transactions were denominated in U.S. dollars.

FINANCIAL CONDITION

Liquidity

As of December 25, 2010, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities balances were approximately $1.8 billion. In comparison, cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of December 26, 2009 were approximately $2.7 billion, of which $904 million represented GF cash and cash equivalents. Without taking into account GF’s financial position, our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities were essentially flat in 2010 when compared to 2009.

Our debt and capital lease obligations as of December 25, 2010 were $2.4 billion, which reflects a debt discount adjustment of $103 million on our 6.00% Notes and 8.125% Notes. This amount also includes approximately $229 million related to our accounts receivable financing arrangement with IBM, which is not a cash obligation. Our financing arrangement with IBM is described in more detail below and under “Contractual Obligations—Receivable financing arrangement.” Without taking into account GF’s indebtedness, we reduced our debt by approximately $357 million during 2010.

For 2010, our adjusted free cash flow was $355 million. Adjusted free cash flow is a non-GAAP measure, which we calculated by taking GAAP net cash used in operating activities of $412 million and adding an amount of $915 million, which represents payments made by certain of our distributor customers to IBM Credit LLC and certain of its subsidiaries (collectively, the IBM Parties) pursuant to an accounts receivable financing arrangement among AMD, certain AMD subsidiaries and the IBM Parties. We adjusted the resulting amount of $503 million by subtracting capital expenditures, which were $148 million for 2010. Prior to 2010, we did not calculate adjusted non-GAAP free cash flow.

We have various supplier agreements with the IBM Parties pursuant to which we sold invoices of selected distributor customers. Because we do not recognize revenue until our distributors sell our products to their customers, under U.S. GAAP, we classify funds received from the IBM Parties as debt on the balance sheet. Moreover, for cash flow purposes, we classify these funds as cash flows from financing activities. When a distributor pays the applicable IBM Party, we reduce the distributor’s accounts receivable and the corresponding

59

Table of Contents

debt, resulting in a non-cash accounting entry. Because we do not receive the cash from the distributor to reduce the accounts receivable, the distributor’s payment is never reflected in our cash flows from operating activities. On February 11, 2011, we terminated these supplier agreements.

Generally, under U.S. GAAP, the reduction in accounts receivable is assumed to be a source of operating cash flows. Therefore, we believe that treating the payments from our distributor customers to the IBM Parties as if we actually received the cash from the distributor and then used that cash to pay down the debt to the IBM Parties is more reflective of the economic substance of our financing arrangement with the IBM Parties. We calculate and communicate adjusted free cash flow because our management believes it is of importance to investors to understand the nature of these cash flows. Our calculation of adjusted free cash flow may or may not be consistent with the calculation of this measure by other companies in the same industry. Investors should not view adjusted free cash flow as an alternative to GAAP liquidity measures of cash flows from operating or financing activities.

We believe that in the event we require additional funding, we will be able to access the capital markets on terms and in amounts adequate to meet our objectives. However, given the possibility of changes in market conditions or other occurrences, we cannot be certain that such funding will be available on terms favorable to us or at all.

Over the longer term, should additional funding be required, such as to meet payment obligations of our long-term debt when due, we may need to raise the required funds through borrowings or public or private sales of debt or equity securities, which may be issued from time to time under an effective registration statement, through the issuance of securities in a transaction exempt from registration under the Securities Act of 1933, or a combination of one or more of the foregoing. However, global market and economic conditions have been challenging, with tighter credit conditions and recession in most major economies. While global economic conditions have improved since the first half of 2009, there can be no assurance that conditions will continue to improve, and they could worsen. If market conditions do not continue to improve or deteriorate, it may limit our ability to access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs, on favorable terms or at all, resulting in adverse effects on our liquidity and financial condition, including our ability to refinance maturing liabilities and access the capital markets to meet liquidity needs.

Auction Rate Securities

As a result of the uncertainties in the credit markets as mentioned above, all of our ARS were negatively affected and auctions for these securities failed to settle on their respective settlement dates. While many of these securities continue to be illiquid, there have been no defaults, and we have received all interest payments as they became due.

In October 2008, UBS AG (UBS) offered to repurchase all of the ARS that we purchased from UBS prior to February 13, 2008. We accepted this offer. We had the right, but not the obligation, to sell, at par, these ARS to UBS from June 30, 2010 through July 2, 2012. During the third quarter of 2010, UBS had redeemed all of our UBS ARS without us exercising the put option.

During 2010, we received $27 million upon the redemption of ARS we had carried at $26 million.

As of December 25, 2010, the par value of our ARS was $66 million, with an estimated fair value of $57 million. Total ARS, at fair value, represented 3% of our total investment portfolio as of December 25, 2010.

Based on the recent tender and redemption activities and the fact that the secondary market for these securities has become more liquid, with pricing generally similar to our carrying value, we classified these securities as marketable securities as of December 25, 2010, because we have the intent and believe we have the ability to sell these securities within the next 12 months.

60

Table of Contents

Operating Activities

Net cash used in operating activities was $412 million in 2010. Net income of $471 million was adjusted for non-cash charges consisting primarily of a $462 million loss from the application of the equity method of accounting for our investment in GF, $383 million of depreciation and amortization expense, $87 million of stock-based compensation expense, $30 million of interest expense primarily related to our 6.00% Notes and our 8.125% Notes and a $24 million net loss primarily related to our repurchase of an aggregate of $1,016 million principal amount of our 6.00% Notes for $1,011 million in cash. These charges were partially offset by a one-time, non-cash gain of $325 million related to the deconsolidation of GF, amortization of foreign grants of $16 million and a net gain of $17 million from the sale of marketable securities. The net changes in operating assets at December 25, 2010 compared to December 26, 2009 included an increase in accounts receivable of $1,138 million, which included the non-cash impact of our financing arrangements with the IBM Parties. During 2010, the IBM Parties collected approximately $915 million from our distributor customers pursuant to these arrangements. Without considering the collection by the IBM Parties of the accounts receivables that we sold to them, our accounts receivable increased $223 million. This increase was primarily due to the introduction and sale of new products towards the end of 2010 and the timing of the related collections. Excluding the effects of the deconsolidation of GF, there was also a decrease in accounts payable, accrued liabilities and other of $184 million, primarily due to the timing of payments. Accounts payable to GF increased by $55 million due to the timing of payments during 2010.

Net cash provided by operating activities was $473 million in 2009, which included $1.2 billion from the settlement of our litigation with Intel. Net income of $293 million was adjusted for non-cash charges consisting primarily of $1.1 billion of depreciation and amortization expense, $121 million of interest expense primarily related to GF’s Class A Notes and Class B Notes and our 6.00% Notes, $75 million of stock-based compensation expense, a $28 million net loss from the sale and disposal of property, plant and equipment and an $11 million net loss primarily related to the redemption of all of our 7.75% Notes. These charges were offset by a net gain of $180 million related to our repurchase of an aggregate of $344 million principal amount of our 6.00% Notes for $161 million in cash and $1,015 million principal amount of our 5.75% Notes for $1,002 million in cash, amortization of foreign grants and allowances of $110 million and a gain of $28 million from the sale of certain Handheld assets. The net changes in operating assets at December 26, 2009 compared to December 27, 2008 included an increase in accounts receivable of $960 million. During 2009, the IBM Parties collected approximately $535 million from our distributor customers pursuant to the financial arrangement described above. Without considering the collections by the IBM Parties of the accounts receivables that we sold to them, the increase in accounts receivable was $425 million. This increase was primarily due to timing of sales and collections during 2009. There was also a decrease in accounts payable and accrued liabilities of $105 million, primarily due to lower purchases reflecting the effect of our cost cutting efforts and timing of payments.

Net cash used in operating activities was $692 million in 2008. Net loss of $3.1 billion was adjusted for non-cash charges consisting primarily of $1.7 billion of goodwill and acquisition-related intangible impairment charges attributable to discontinued operations, $1.2 billion of depreciation and amortization expense, $83 million of stock-based compensation expense, $77 million of other than temporary impairment on our marketable securities, $29 million net loss from the sale and disposal of property, plant and equipment and $29 million of interest expense primarily related to our 6.00% Notes. These charges were offset by a $193 million net gain on the sale of certain 200-millimeter wafer fabrication equipment, the amortization of foreign grants and allowances of $107 million and a net gain of $34 million on our repurchase of a portion of our 6.00% Notes. The net changes in our operating assets at December 27, 2008 compared to December 29, 2007 included a decrease of $722 million in accounts payable and accrued liabilities primarily reflecting the effects of our cost cutting efforts and a decrease of $101 million in accounts receivable. During 2008, the IBM Parties collected approximately $221 million from our distributor customers pursuant to the financing arrangements described above. Without considering the collections by the IBM Parties of the accounts receivables that we sold to them, the decrease in accounts receivable was $322 million primarily due to a decrease in sales and improved cash collection efforts in 2008. There was also a decrease of $64 million in prepaid and other current assets primarily related to a decrease in receivables of foreign grants and allowances.

61

Table of Contents

Investing Activities

Net cash used in investing activities was $1.1 billion in 2010. The cash flow effect of the deconsolidation of GF was an outflow of $904 million, which consisted of GF’s cash and cash equivalents. In addition, we had a net cash outflow of $147 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment and of $160 million for purchases of available-for-sale securities. The net cash outflows were partially offset by a net cash inflow of $69 million from the sale of trading securities.

Net cash used in investing activities was $1.3 billion in 2009 primarily as a result of a net cash outflow of $883 million for the purchase of available-for-sale securities and $466 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment, of which $394 million related to property, plant and equipment attributable to the Foundry segment. This was partially offset by $58 million of proceeds from sale of certain Handheld assets and $14 million of proceeds from the maturity of trading securities.

Net cash used in investing activities was $27 million in 2008. A cash outflow of $624 million for purchases of property, plant and equipment and $95 million in connection with the exercise of our call option to repurchase the partnership interests in AMD Fab 36 KG held by one of the unaffiliated partners, Fab 36 Beteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG, were partially offset by $343 million of proceeds from the sale of property, plant and equipment, primarily 200 millimeter equipment, $216 million in net proceeds from the sale and maturity of available-for-sale securities and $127 million of cash proceeds from sale of our Digital Television business unit.

Financing Activities

Net cash provided by financing activities was $484 million in 2010 primarily as a result of proceeds of $988 million from our financing arrangements with the IBM Parties, $490 million from the sale and issuance of $500 million aggregate principal amount of the 7.75% Notes, $19 million in proceeds from foreign grants from the Canadian government for research and development activities related to our Fusion products and from the Malaysian and Chinese governments for our local microprocessor assembly, test and packaging facilities and $15 million from the exercise of employee stock options. These amounts were partially offset by payments of $1,011 million to repurchase $1,016 million aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes. During 2010, we did not realize any excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation. Therefore, we did not record any related financing cash flows.

Net cash provided by financing activities was $1.5 billion in 2009 primarily as a result of proceeds of $2.3 billion from the issuance of GF’s Class A Notes, Class B Notes, Class A Preferred Shares and Class B Preferred Shares, of which $1.6 billion constituted cash proceeds to GF, proceeds of $605 million from the sale of certain of our accounts receivable to the IBM Parties pursuant to the financing arrangement described above, proceeds of $440 million from the issuance of $500 million aggregate principle of 8.125% Notes, proceeds of $15 million from the AMD China Revolving Credit Line, proceeds of $125 million from the sale of 58 million shares of AMD common stock and warrants to purchase 35 million shares of AMD common stock at an exercise price of $0.01 per share to WCH in connection with the formation of the GF manufacturing joint venture, and proceeds from grants and allowances from the Federal Republic of Germany and the State of Saxony of $55 million for GF’s Dresden manufacturing facilities. These amounts were partially offset by payments to Leipziger Messe of $180 million to repurchase its partnership interests in AMD Fab 36 KG, $67 million related to the guaranteed rate of return on those partnership interests and $10 million related to a call option premium to Leipziger Messe for the early repurchase of its partnership interests. Net cash provided by financing activities was also partially offset by $1.8 billion of payments on certain debt and cash obligations, consisting of $1,002 million to repurchase $1,015 million aggregate principal amount of our 5.75% Notes, $398 million to redeem $390 million aggregate principal amount of our 7.75% Notes and $161 million to repurchase $344 million aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes. During 2009, we did not realize any excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation. Therefore, we did not record any related financing cash flows.

Net cash provided by financing activities was $220 million in 2008, primarily due to proceeds of $308 million from the financing arrangement with the IBM Parties described above and proceeds of grants and

62

Table of Contents

allowances from the Federal Republic of Germany and the State of Saxony of $161 million for our former Dresden manufacturing facilities. These amounts were partially offset by $166 million of payments on certain debt and cash obligations, consisting of $20 million for the repurchase of $60 million aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes, $38 million for the exercise of our call option to repurchase the silent partnership contributions in AMD Fab 36 KG held by Fab 36 Beteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG, $25 million for the mandatory repurchase of a portion of the silent partnership contributions in AMD Fab 36 KG held by Leipziger Messe and $19 million in payments for the guaranteed return on the unaffiliated limited partners’ limited partnership contributions. During 2008, we did not realize any excess tax benefit related to stock-based compensation. Therefore, we did not record any related financing cash flows.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our consolidated principal contractual cash obligations, as of December 25, 2010, and is supplemented by the discussion following the table:

5.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2012

On August 14, 2007, we issued $1.5 billion aggregate principal amount of 5.75% Convertible Senior Notes due 2012 (the 5.75% Notes). The 5.75% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable in arrears on February 15 and August 15 of each year beginning February 15, 2008 until the maturity date of August 15, 2012. The terms of the 5.75% Notes are governed by an Indenture (the 5.75% Indenture), dated as of August 14, 2007, by and between us and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee.

63

Table of Contents

In 2009, we repurchased $1,015 million in aggregate principal amount of our outstanding 5.75% Notes for $1,002 million in cash. As of December 25, 2010, the remaining outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 5.75% Notes was $485 million.

The 5.75% Notes will be convertible, in whole or in part, at any time prior to the close of business on the business day immediately preceding the maturity date of the 5.75% Notes, into shares of our common stock based on an initial conversion rate of 49.6771 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of the 5.75% Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of approximately $20.13 per share. This initial conversion price represents a premium of 50% relative to the last reported sale price of our common stock on August 8, 2007 (the trading date preceding the date of pricing of the 5.75% Notes) of $13.42 per share. This initial conversion rate will be adjusted for certain anti-dilution events. In addition, the conversion rate will be increased in the case of corporate events that constitute a fundamental change (as defined in the 5.75% Indenture) of AMD under certain circumstances. Holders of the 5.75% Notes may require us to repurchase the 5.75% Notes for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount to be repurchased plus accrued and unpaid interest upon the occurrence of a fundamental change (as defined in the 5.75% Indenture) or a termination of trading (as defined in the 5.75% Indenture). Additionally, an event of default (as defined in the 5.75% Indenture) may result in the acceleration of the maturity of the 5.75% Notes.

The 5.75% Notes rank equally with our existing and future senior debt and are senior to all of our future subordinated debt. The 5.75% Notes rank junior to all of our existing and future senior secured debt to the extent of the collateral securing such debt and are structurally subordinated to all existing and future debt and liabilities of our subsidiaries.

We may elect to purchase or otherwise retire the remaining amount of our 5.75% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer, when we believe the market conditions are favorable to do so.

6.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015

On April 27, 2007, we issued $2.2 billion aggregate principal amount of 6.00% Convertible Senior Notes due 2015. The 6.00% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on May 1 and November 1 of each year beginning November 1, 2007 until the maturity date of May 1, 2015. The terms of the 6.00% Notes are governed by an Indenture (the 6.00% Indenture) dated April 27, 2007, by and between us and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee.

In 2008, we repurchased $60 million in aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes for $21 million. In 2009 we repurchased $344 million in aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes for $161 million. In 2010, we repurchased $1,016 million in aggregate principal amount our 6.00% Notes for $1,011 million. As of December 25, 2010, the outstanding aggregate principal amount of our 6.00% Notes was $780 million and the remaining carrying value was approximately $723 million, net of debt discount of $57 million.

Upon the occurrence of certain events described in the 6.00% Indenture, the 6.00% Notes will be convertible into cash up to the principal amount, and if applicable, into shares of our common stock issuable upon conversion of the 6.00% Notes in respect of any conversion value above the principal amount, based on an initial conversion rate of 35.6125 shares of common stock per $1,000 principal amount of 6.00% Notes, which is equivalent to an initial conversion price of $28.08 per share. This initial conversion price represents a premium of 100% relative to the last reported sale price of our common stock on April 23, 2007 (the trading date preceding the date of pricing of the 6.00% Notes) of $14.04 per share. The conversion rate will be adjusted for certain anti-dilution events. In addition, the conversion rate will be increased in the case of corporate events that constitute a fundamental change (as defined in the 6.00% Indenture) under certain circumstances. Holders of the 6.00% Notes may require us to repurchase the 6.00% Notes for cash equal to 100% of the principal amount to be repurchased plus accrued and unpaid interest upon the occurrence of a fundamental change or a termination of trading (as defined in the 6.00% Indenture). Additionally, an event of default (as defined in the 6.00% Indenture) may result in the acceleration of the maturity of the 6.00% Notes.

64

Table of Contents

The 6.00% Notes rank equally with our existing and future senior debt and are senior to all of our future subordinated debt. The 6.00% Notes rank junior to all of our existing and future senior secured debt to the extent of the collateral securing such debt and are structurally subordinated to all existing and future debt and liabilities of our subsidiaries.

We may elect to purchase or otherwise retire the remaining balance of our 6.00% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or privately negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer, when we believe the market conditions are favorable to do so.

8.125% Senior Notes Due 2017

On November 30, 2009, we issued $500 million of the 8.125% Notes at a discount of 10.204%. The 8.125% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on June 15 and December 15 of each year beginning June 15, 2010 until the maturity date of December 15, 2017. The discount of $51 million is recorded as contra debt and is amortized to interest expense over the life of the 8.125% Notes using the effective interest method. The 8.125% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 8.125% Indenture) dated November 30, 2009 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee.

At any time (which may be more than once) before December 15, 2012, we can redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount of the 8.125% Notes within 90 days of the closing of an equity offering with the net proceeds thereof at a redemption price not greater than 108.125% of the principal amount thereof, together with accrued and unpaid interest to but excluding the date of redemption. Prior to December 15, 2013, we may redeem some or all of the 8.125% Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make whole” premium (as defined in the 8.125% Indenture).

From December 15, 2013, we may redeem the 8.125% Notes for cash at the following specified prices plus accrued and unpaid interest:

Holders have the right to require us to repurchase all or a portion of our 8.125% Notes in the event that we undergo a change of control, as defined in the 8.125% Indenture at a repurchase price of 101% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Additionally, an event of default (as defined in the 8.125% Indenture) may result in the acceleration of the maturity of the 8.125% Notes.

The 8.125% Indenture contains certain covenants that limit, among other things, our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries, from:

65

Table of Contents

The 8.125% Notes rank equally with our existing and future senior debt and are senior to all of our future subordinated debt. The 8.125% Notes rank junior to all of our existing and future senior secured debt to the extent of the collateral securing such debt and are structurally subordinated to all existing and future debt and liabilities of our subsidiaries.

We may elect to purchase or otherwise retire the 8.125% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or private negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer, when we believe the market conditions are favorable to do so.

7.75% Senior Notes Due 2020

On August 4, 2010, we issued $500 million of the 7.75% Notes. The 7.75% Notes are our general unsecured senior obligations. Interest is payable on February 1 and August 1 of each year beginning February 1, 2011 until the maturity date of August 1, 2020. The 7.75% Notes are governed by the terms of an indenture (the 7.75% Indenture) dated August 4, 2010 between us and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee.

At any time (which may be more than once) before August 1, 2013, we can redeem up to 35% of the aggregate principal amount of the 7.75% Notes within 90 days of the closing of an equity offering with the net proceeds thereof at a redemption price not greater than 107.75% of the principal amount thereof, together with accrued and unpaid interest to but excluding the date of redemption. Prior to August 1, 2015, we may redeem some or all of the 7.75% Notes at a price equal to 100% of the principal amount, plus accrued and unpaid interest and a “make whole” premium (as defined in the 7.75% Indenture).

From August 1, 2015, we may redeem the 7.75% Notes for cash at the following specified prices plus accrued and unpaid interest:

Holders have the right to require us to repurchase all or a portion of our 7.75% Notes in the event that we undergo a change of control, as defined in the 7.75% Indenture at a repurchase price of 101% of the principal amount plus accrued and unpaid interest. Additionally, an event of default (as defined in the 7.75% Indenture) may result in the acceleration of the maturity of the 7.75% Notes.

The 7.75% Indenture contains certain covenants that limit, among other things, our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries, from:

66

Table of Contents

The 7.75% Notes rank equally with our existing and future senior debt and are senior to all of our future subordinated debt. The 7.75% Notes rank junior to all of our existing and future senior secured debt to the extent of the collateral securing such debt and are structurally subordinated to all existing and future debt and liabilities of our subsidiaries.

We may elect to purchase or otherwise retire the 7.75% Notes with cash, stock or other assets from time to time in open market or private negotiated transactions, either directly or through intermediaries, or by tender offer, when we believe the market conditions are favorable to do so.

The agreements governing our 5.75% Notes, 6.00% Notes, 8.125% Notes and 7.75% Notes contain cross-default provisions whereby a default under one agreement would likely result in cross defaults under agreements covering the other borrowings. The occurrence of a default under any of these borrowing arrangements would permit the applicable note holders to declare all amounts outstanding under those borrowing arrangements to be immediately due and payable.

Other Long-Term Liabilities

Other long-term liabilities in the contractual obligations table above include $11 million related to employee benefit obligations and $35 million of payments due under certain software and technology licenses that will be paid through 2013 and 2015, respectively.

Other long-term liabilities excludes amounts recorded on our consolidated balance sheet that do not require us to make cash payments, which, as of December 25, 2010, primarily consisted of $20 million of deferred gains resulting from the sale and leaseback of certain of our facilities. Also excluded from other long-term liabilities is $11 million of non-current unrecognized tax benefits, which are included in the caption “Other long-term liabilities” on our consolidated balance sheet at December 25, 2010. Included in the non-current unrecognized tax benefits is a potential cash payment of approximately $4 million that could be payable by us upon settlement with a taxing authority. We have not included this amount in the contractual obligations table above because we cannot make a reasonably reliable estimate regarding the timing of any settlement with the taxing authority, if any.

Capital Lease Obligations

As of December 25, 2010, we had aggregate outstanding capital lease obligations of $30 million for one of our facilities in Canada, which is payable in monthly installments through 2017.

Operating Leases

We lease certain of our facilities and in some jurisdictions we lease the land on which these facilities are built, under non-cancelable lease agreements that expire at various dates through 2018. We lease certain manufacturing and office equipment for terms ranging from 1 to 5 years. Total future non-cancelable lease obligations as of December 25, 2010 were $176 million, of which $7 million is accrued as a liability for certain facilities that were included in our 2008 restructuring plans. These payments will be made through 2012.

Purchase Obligations

Total non-cancelable purchase obligations, other than those to GF under the wafer supply agreement, as of December 25, 2010 were $419 million for periods through 2016. Our purchase obligations primarily include our

67

Table of Contents

obligations to purchase wafers and substrates from third parties. We currently estimate that we will pay GF approximately $1.5 billion in 2011 and $1.5 billion in 2012. We based our 2011 and 2012 estimated costs in part on our current expectations regarding GF’s manufacturing yields, wafer volumes, and demand for our products. We are not able to meaningfully quantify or estimate our purchase obligations to GF beyond 2012, but we expect that our future purchases from GF will continue to be material.

Receivable financing arrangement

The contractual obligations table above excludes the amounts we receive in connection with our accounts receivable financing arrangement with the IBM Parties because we are not required to make cash payments pursuant to the terms of the arrangement. As of December 25, 2010, only selected distributor customers have participated in this program. Because we do not recognize revenue until our distributors sell our products to our customers, we classify funds received from the IBM parties as debt. The debt is reduced as the IBM parties receive payments from our customers. In 2010, we received proceeds of approximately $988 million from the sale of accounts receivable under these financing arrangements, and the IBM parties collected approximately $915 million from the distributors participating in the arrangements. $229 million and $156 million were outstanding under these agreements as of December 25, 2010 and December 26, 2009, respectively. These amounts appear as “Other short-term obligations” on our consolidated balance sheets and are not considered cash commitments. On February 11, 2011, we terminated these supplier agreements. As a result, we expect that as of the third quarter of 2011, we will transition away from making the adjustment for the distributors’ payments to the IBM Parties to our GAAP net cash provided by operating activities when calculating our non-GAAP adjusted free cash flow.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

Guarantees of Indebtedness Not Recorded on our Consolidated Balance Sheet

Fab 36 Guarantee

On April 21, 2004, our former German subsidiary, AMD Fab 36 KG, the legal entity that owned our 300-millimeter wafer fabrication facility, Fab 36, entered into a 700 million euro Term Loan Facility Agreement among AMD Fab 36 KG, as borrower, and a consortium of banks led by Dresdner Bank AG, as lenders, and other related agreements (collectively, the Fab 36 Loan Agreements) to finance the purchase of equipment and tools required to operate Fab 36. We guaranteed the obligations of AMD Fab 36 KG to the lenders under the Fab 36 Loan Agreements.

In connection with the consummation of the GF manufacturing joint venture transaction on March 2, 2009, the terms of the Fab 36 Loan Agreements were amended to allow for the transfer of our former 300-millimeter wafer fabrication facility and its affiliated companies to GF. In addition, we also amended the terms of the related guarantee agreement such that we and GF are joint guarantors of the borrower’s obligations to the lenders under the Fab 36 Loan Agreements. However, if we are called upon to make any payments under the guarantee agreement, GF has separately agreed to indemnify us for the full amount of such payments. As of December 25, 2010, the total amount outstanding under the Fab 36 Term Loan was $170 million, and the rate of interest on the loan was 2%. This loan is repayable by GF in quarterly installments which terminate in March 2011.

Effective with the deconsolidation of GF, the Fab 36 Term Loan was no longer an obligation of AMD and, therefore, it does not appear as debt on our December 25, 2010 consolidated balance sheet. However, we remain subject to the terms of the guarantee agreement until the loan is repaid by GF. As of December 25, 2010, we were in compliance with the covenants under the guarantee agreement.

68

Table of Contents

AMTC and BAC Guarantees

The Advanced Mask Technology Center GmbH & Co. KG (AMTC) and Maskhouse Building Administration GmbH & Co. KG (BAC) are joint ventures initially formed for the purpose of constructing and operating an advanced photomask facility in Dresden, Germany. AMTC provides advanced photomasks for use in manufacturing our microprocessors.

In January 2010, we signed binding agreements to transfer our limited partnership interests in the AMTC and BAC to GF. On March 31, 2010, our limited partnership interests in AMTC and BAC were effectively transferred to an affiliate of GF. Concurrent with the transfer, a term loan related to BAC, a revolving credit facility for the benefit of the AMTC and related documents were amended. Toppan Photomasks Germany GmbH (Toppan Germany) leased a portion of the BAC facility from the BAC. In connection with the amendments to the BAC term loan, AMTC assumed all of Toppan Germany’s rental obligations and Toppan Germany and GF agreed to guarantee AMTC’s payment obligations to the BAC. The remaining portion of the BAC facility is leased by AMTC through a separate lease agreement. The initial guarantee agreement concerning AMTC’s rental payments was terminated and replaced with a new AMTC rental contract guarantee. Pursuant to this guarantee, we, Toppan Germany and GF guarantee AMTC’s rental obligations relating to the remaining portion of the BAC facility. Our portion of the guarantee corresponds with our exposure under the initial guarantee agreement and is made on a joint and several basis with GF. Moreover, GF has separately agreed to indemnify us under certain circumstances if we are called upon to make any payments under the AMTC rental contract guarantee. As of December 25, 2010, our joint and several guarantee of the rental obligation was $3 million.

In connection with the amendment to the AMTC revolving credit facility, the guarantee agreement was amended so that we and GF are joint and several guarantors of 50% of AMTC’s outstanding loan balance under the AMTC revolving credit facility. In the event we are called upon to make any payments under the guarantee agreement, GF has separately agreed to indemnify us so long as certain conditions are met. As of December 25, 2010, the amount outstanding under this loan was $40 million and our joint and several guarantee obligation was $20 million.

Discontinued Operations

In 2008, we evaluated the viability of our non-core businesses and determined that our Digital Television business unit was not directly aligned with our core strategy of computing and graphics market opportunities. Accordingly, we decided to divest this business unit.

We performed an interim impairment test of goodwill and acquired intangible assets during 2008. We concluded that the carrying amounts of goodwill and certain acquisition-related intangible assets associated with the Digital Television business unit were impaired, and we recorded an impairment charge of $473 million.

During the third quarter of 2008, we entered into an agreement with Broadcom Corporation to sell the Digital Television business unit for $141.5 million. The transaction was completed on October 27, 2008. Based on the final terms of the sale transaction, we recorded an additional goodwill impairment charge of $135 million. As a result of the decisions and transactions described above, pursuant to applicable accounting guidance, the operating results of the Digital Television business unit are presented as discontinued operations in the consolidated statements of operations for the applicable periods presented. Cash flows from discontinued operations were not material and were combined with cash flows from continuing operations within the consolidated statement of cash flows categories.

69

Table of Contents

The results from discontinued operations for our former Digital Television business unit were as follows: