193 pointsby ryandotsmith7 days ago12 comments
  • vessenes7 days ago
    Love reading these highly detailed analyses. Short version: Zhaoxin's currently competitive with 2010/2011-era AMD and Intel, with some asterisks around RAM speed.

    There is to my mind a sort of race to get up to "fast enough to host H100 competitor AI hardware" with non-US IP that makes sense to engage in. In those terms, it looks like they're maybe 2 revs away -- I'm not sure what process node the KX7000 is on, but there's some architectural work to finish up. That said, this is interesting. I assume the chips will continue to improve from Zhaoxin, unless they lose their core team.

    • undefuser5 days ago
      If the goal is to make a CPU that is "fast enough to host H100 competitor AI hardware", then why bother with x64? Huawei could have just produced a powerful ARM chip to go with their new AI processor. After all, Nvidia GB200 also uses Arm-based CPUs (the Grace in GB).
    • chasil7 days ago
      "Zhaoxin did not specify what process node they’re using. Techpowerup and Wccftech suggests it uses an unspecified 16nm node."
      • vessenes6 days ago
        That’s pretty easily verified by a reasonably competent chip engineer and a microscope, if its 16 and they need to stay on shore only, they could be a little closer in terms of time than I speculated. SMIC at 7nm is reportedly stable; not sure about yields though.

        I think if I were in charge I’d probably do a final architecture spin at 16, and then shrink that one to 7 or 5 if I could get it.

  • jkampman7 days ago
    This review is an object lesson about why there is so much more to shipping a decent processor than making a CPU core with reasonable performance (and decent is being polite given that we are talking about Bulldozer-class single-threaded perf, which most folks were beyond thrilled to abandon when Zen arrived eight years ago.)

    The behavior of the memory controller is wild to see in this day and age. You really don't want to see latency that high in general, but especially not for a client processor. I'd really like to see how it behaves with a reasonably powerful GPU in a CPU-bound gaming workload relative to the competition (to simulate what one of these might see in an internet café setting, for instance).

    Power efficiency also seems truly dismal according to PCWatch: https://pc.watch.impress.co.jp/docs/column/hothot/1626253.ht... . In Cinebench MT, it's consuming about the same power as a Ryzen 5 5600G while delivering about 1/3 the performance, and the idle power is much higher than the Core i3-8100/R5 5600G to boot. That's not a huge issue for desktops, but it would not make a good foundation for a mobile system.

    Overall an improvement versus past Zhaoxin efforts but people shouldn't kid themselves about the quality of the overall package here. There is a long way to go.

    • luyu_wu7 days ago
      Absolutely a lomg way to go.

      Interestingly, the chip is rated to run at DDR4-3200 or DDR5, so it's strange C&C got half that.

      The power issues are likely from by modern standards pre-historical clocking behavior (single P-state to my understanding)!

      • clamchowder7 days ago
        It does clock ramp from 800 MHz idle to 3.2 GHz under load, with 900, 1000, 1100, 1300, 1500, 1800, 2200, and 2700 MHz steps in between until it hits 3.2 GHz after 71.6 ms. Article was getting long enough so I just left it at, it reaches 3.2 GHz and stays there even though the spec sheet says it should go higher.

        I remoted into the system for testing (Cheese/George had it), and he said it took 3-4 cold reboots for it to come up, and suspected memory wasn't training correctly. So I did all the testing without ever rebooting the system, because it might not come back up if I tried.

        • jkampman7 days ago
          Tangential but thank you for always providing such detailed benchmarks and insights. Your work is a treasure!
    • sitkack7 days ago
      Memory controllers are the biggest bottleneck (ha) to performant systems these days. The cores themselves are fine, but the memory controllers are slow and buggy.
    • throwaway815237 days ago
      This appears to be a new x86 design, but why? I thought there was good riscv-64 stuff out there now.
      • RetroTechie7 days ago
        (Binary) compatibility? Not everyone runs Linux, most software can't be recompiled. And emulation tends to come with a heavy speed penalty.
      • spookie6 days ago
        They are "cooperating" with VIA. Basically, they didn't start from 0.
  • mappu7 days ago
    I wonder if Zhaoxin's VIA heritage is helping them or holding them back - because of the patents, they were the only ones allowed to try, but since x86_64 and SSE2 are both now more than 20 years old, most of the patents don't matter any more (and AVX is not far from the cutoff).

    The breakaway ARM China or SpacemiT or Loongson could drop in an x86_64 frontend and might get better results.

  • hawflakes7 days ago
    Minor nit. Compound pinyin words shouldn’t use StudlyCaps so it should be “Lujiazui”
    • powerapple5 days ago
      I think it should. Chinese language does not have the concept of word in writing, there is no space, and each character is a unit in writing. Pinyin was to mark pronunciations of each characters, it would be Lu Jia Zui, meaning 3 characters. Pinyin is not English. LuJiaZui would make it easier to pronounce if you don't know Pinyin. There is no standard way to write it though, maybe Lu-Jia-Zui, Lu'Jia'Zui, or Lu'jia'zui. The most confusing and would lead to wrong pronunciation version is Lujiazui.
  • IncreasePosts7 days ago
    What's the deal with the municipal government being a partner in this project? Is that structure common in china? Is it just them giving VIA tax breaks and things, or are they more involved than that?
    • Havoc7 days ago
      Yeah. They know the chips aren’t commercially competitive so they just create artificial demand by making gov and state controlled entities buy it.

      Basically an attempt to bootstrap an industry brute force style

      • jandrese7 days ago
        Seems like it depends on the price point. These chips might be slow by modern standards, but if they're cheap enough then it doesn't really matter for a lot of the potential applications. I'm typing this post on a chip that is roughly in that performance bracket (an i5-3750k) that only rarely feels like the bottleneck. And this is my gaming machine.
        • 9999000009997 days ago
          Plus the vast majority of work computers don’t need to be particularly fast. Add a lightweight Linux distro, and that’s more than enough for paperwork.
          • OmarAssadi7 days ago
            Early into high school, I needed something to take to class, but since I already had a decent desktop at home, plus we were broke, I picked up some cheap Asus K55N; AMD A8-4500M, 4GB DDR3, etc -- nothing particularly fancy; only upgrade I did to it was removing the mechanical hard drive and swapping in my old 120GB Corsair Force GT.

            I eventually upgraded, went off to university, etc. When I finally came home, I found out my mom apparently "borrowed" it, figured out how to install Ubuntu, and has been using it ever since for grading papers and what not.

            No idea how much longer it will remain in use, but aside from the awful screen, ironically, honestly, I think the browser and the seemingly ever increasing resource requirements of the web will eventually be the only thing that finally causes an upgrade.

            • khedoros16 days ago
              I've got a desktop with a Core2Quad Q9300, originally built in 2008. Updated the motherboard in 2010 to one with USB3, updated the GPU in 2012. Kept using that machine as my daily-driver until 2020, when I built my current desktop. The only real reason that I did that was to improve gaming performance. The machine itself still functions fine on the modern web (using an up-to-date Linux distro, of course). 8GB of RAM used to feel like a monster.
            • 9999000009996 days ago
              As is the Chinese web tends to be less full of complex JavaScript and CSS tricks.

              It wouldn't surprise me if these processors are more than fine for municipal workers.

        • mrandish7 days ago
          I'm running a well-optimized 2014 Haswell I5-4590 system with a Radeon 7800 XT in my virtual pinball cabinet. It's handling real-time 3D at 1440p 120fps at medium-high settings and VPX is pretty CPU heavy. My system is probably only a generation or two ahead of the one described (although it's true that Haswell was one of those occasional Intel generations that became legendary for outperforming and generally aging very well).
          • remlov7 days ago
            Haswell/Broadwell with embedded 128MB of eDRAM Level 4 cache are some extremely awesome hidden gems.
          • p1necone7 days ago
            That's very lopsided in favor of the GPU - if VPX is more CPU intensive that the average video game you could probably swap the 7800 xt for something much cheaper and get the same performance.
            • mrandish7 days ago
              Yes, I agree. I was actually planning to retire that mobo and CPU after the GFX upgrade but that damn Haswell is so good, I didn't need to. The previous GFX card (a 1080) was the bottleneck getting 120fps reliably. I really didn't expect the i5-4590 to keep up with 120fps at low latency but got surprised.
              • hypercube336 days ago
                The Intel i5 4000 series was an odd duck and keeps pace still today in a lot of things. I still have one running my Plex workload kicking around.
                • 3 days ago
                  undefined
    • markus_zhang7 days ago
      Yeah it is pretty common. Governments invest in key area corporations to provide fund, tax breaks, regulatory aid and a bunch of other benefits, and sometimes sell its chunk of shares in a few years.

      One early example is Chongqing government with Huang Qifan as mayor back in the 2010s.

    • fspeech7 days ago
      Do governments allow some of their employees to be highly compensated relative to others? Would someone with real expertise in chip development work for the government at what the government is willing to pay? I think the answer is no.
      • wmf7 days ago
        The Chinese government has definitely "bought back" some top talent from the US. It's probably a small number of people.

        I'm not sure why local governments would get involved although in general China has had a problem with too much investment and not enough places for it to go. It's not impossible that there are essentially local sovereign wealth funds.

        • fspeech7 days ago
          They work at companies or universities, and there is a "market" to look to for the pay scale.
      • dghlsakjg7 days ago
        This initiative seems to be a private company propped up by government funds rather than direct government employment. Think Lockheed Martin not DARPA.
    • jenny917 days ago
      Yes, it's very common in China.
  • marcodiego7 days ago
    Hmmm.. it maybe free from IME! Maybe the FSF want a word with them.
    • haunter7 days ago
      No IME but whatever unknown chinese rootkit? Out of the frying pan, into the fire
      • marcodiego7 days ago
        I can reason about an "unknown chinese rootkit" as much as about an "unknown US rootkit".
  • daniel_iversen7 days ago
    This is interesting! Does anyone know how China’s reliance on chips from intel and amd is in the non-AI space (so regular consumer and server loads)? I’m wondering how it was 10 and 5 years ago, now, and how we predict in the next couple of years. Surely if they’re not mostly using their own chips they will very soon right?
    • rjzzleep7 days ago
      They push local chips for independence, but unless the west embargoes them, I don't think you will see a major leap forward.

      Huawei is a whole different beast though. They have a everything from the chip design up, and by now also an operating system that has arguably both a better frontend framework and a better kernel that the Linux alternatives. When we talk about Chinese AI chips being slow we specifically talk about classic desktop chips.

      Also! For normal desktop work a 2011 intel chip is plenty fast. A lot of critical systems like train booking systems are keyboard focused ancient UI systems, and they seem fine.

      • MaxPock6 days ago
        If Huawei had access to TSMC and free of sanctions,it would have run so many companies out of town.
    • ksec6 days ago
      Ignoring Fabs for now which is a different sets of issues.

      They have JV with ARM ( ARM China ) and AMD ( Zen 1 ), IMG ( PowerVR and MIPS ) Along with investment on RISC-V. Alibaba and Huawei are all investing into RISC-V as well. Considering they dont sell CPU I wont be surprised if China one day give away RISC-V CPU design for free.

      Surprisingly ARM China issue is still somewhat unresolved and ARM now has a separate subsidiary inside China.

    • daniel_iversen7 days ago
      [flagged]
  • Merrill7 days ago
    How would use of the Kylin OS instead of Windows 11 affect the user's perception of performance?
    • hulitu7 days ago
      > How would use of the Kylin OS instead of Windows 11 affect the user's perception of performance?

      Windows 11 is dog slow on corporate hardware. Linux, even with bloated KDE or Gnome, is much faster.

  • gitroom7 days ago
    Been interesting following Zhaoxin, but yeah, looks like there's still a mountain to climb before these chips hit the big time. Kinda wild they're still so far behind, but I get why China wants to push their own stuff anyway.
  • snvzz7 days ago
    Note there are competent RISC-V architectures in China which might already be faster at emulating x86 than the KX-7000 is at running it directly.
    • orangeboats7 days ago
      Not just RISC-V, when it comes to performance the Loongson CPUs (with the LoongArch ISA) are likely the most competitive -- the IPC of Loongson 3A6000 is around that of 10th ~ 12th gen Intel CPUs! And 3A7000 is coming soon.

      Zhaoxin is China's answer to "what if we need a drop-in x86 replacement immediately?" It does not represent the frontier of CPU development in the country.

      • kjs36 days ago
        Zhaoxin is China's answer to "what if we need a drop-in x86 replacement immediately?"

        Exactly this. China isn't going to be doing HPC on these, or building domestic clouds, or wooing gamers. This is a strategic project so Chinese users can continue to access the x86 ecosystem regardless of 'supply chain issues'.[1][2] And much of that ecosystem can get by with a fraction of the compute of the average gamer, it's just fine that it hits mediocre performance numbers, for now.

        [1] And, sure, some national pride. No harm in that. [2] No, "emulators!" is not the only answer.

      • happycube6 days ago
        It's also not the only answer, one Chinese company has rights to Zen 1. (which shows just how close AMD was to bankruptcy)
        • tempeler6 days ago
          Rather than signaling AMD's bankruptcy, this could be seen as a strong indication of how heavily China is investing in legacy technologies. That's why I wouldn't be so quick to draw conclusions. China’s eagerness in this area doesn’t mean that the investments are efficient. What truly matters here is the ability to build a full ecosystem. They practically wiped Huawei off the global smartphone market simply by banning Google services on their devices.
          • happycube4 days ago
            The license was done in 2016, though. It does not cover any later versions, and even if it did it would be cut off due to export restrictions.
  • cake-rusk6 days ago
    Why does anyone still need to license the x86 ISA? Haven't all / sufficient number of patents expired by now?
  • tempeler6 days ago
    it seems bad investment. firstly, it's an old architecure. secondly, How will they measure the efficiency of their investments?.Instead of investing in outdated architectures, they could fund universities, or support at least two or more companies in a competitive setup — that way, something much more efficient might emerge. But when a company is state-funded in a monopolistic way, it's quite hard for it to succeed. The U.S. had a reason for supporting AMD against Intel back then.
    • ptx6 days ago
      They are doing that as well. There's a lot of investment in RISC-V: https://asiatimes.com/2025/03/china-all-in-on-risc-v-open-so...

      For x86, supporting multiple companies would be more difficult, as they would need a license for the ISA (which Zhaoxin inherits from Via).

      • tempeler6 days ago
        risc-v is much more reasonable for countries like china.What I want to emphasize is this: Instead of paying license fees for outdated x86 architectures, it would be much more beneficial to allocate those resources to universities. If you're paying for a license but can't generate a return on that investment quickly, then something is wrong.
        • spookie6 days ago
          You are completely misunderstanding China's goal. They want the expertise, being self-sufficient, while taking what they can so they don't start from 0.

          Risc-V is arguably risky, so they have their hands on everything at the same time so they're sure they have a winner.

          Markets don't matter. They want to develop the technology and have the talent to achieve it, fast.

    • happycube6 days ago
      As in the article, it doesn't have to be good. yet.