Alleged Zhaoxin KX-6000G benchmarks surface — Chinese-made chips perform like CPUs from the late 2000s but uses less power

News
By
published

Comparable to desktop CPUs from 20 years ago, laptop CPUs from 10.

Zhaoxin
(Image credit: Zhaoxin)

Geekbench 5 scores for Zhaoxin's KX-6000G CPU have leaked out, allegedly revealing that the processor has about the same performance as high-end desktop chips from the late 2000s (via @BenchLeaks). Though the CPU certainly isn't very fast, it does operate at such a low power level that might make it suitable for laptops, which would put it roughly between Intel's 4th Generation Haswell and 5th Generation Broadwell Core i3 CPUs. Treat the results with a pinch of salt.

The exact name of this KX-6000G model isn't clear. Zhaoxin's spec sheet for the KX-6000G series indicates that there are two different CPUs, but without any specific names attached. We at least know this chip isn't the KX-6640MA G2 from last month, which is a different CPU from the regular KX-6640MA. The KX-6000G tested in Geekbench 5 is the model with the lower TDP of 15 watts, and consequently operates at a lower frequency. It has four cores and four threads, 4MB of L2 cache, and can use up to 64GB of DDR4-3200, which puts this CPU firmly in the low-end.

Swipe to scroll horizontally
KX-6000G Specs and Benchmark Scores
Row 0 - Cell 0 KX-6000GCore 2 Quad Q6600Core i3-4010UCore i5-5015U
Cores4422
Threads4444
Base Frequency2 GHz2.4 GHz1.7 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost Frequency3 GHzN/AN/AN/A
Cache4MB L28MB L2512KB L2 + 3MB L3512KB L2 + 3MB L3
TDP15W105W15W15W
Single-Core Score397331376471
Multi-Core Score1,0351,0338561,058

Unfortunately, because the KX-6000G was tested in Geekbench 5, its scores can't be compared to the KX-6640MA G2, which was benchmarked in Geekbench 6. However, we can consult the Geekbench 5 scoreboard via the Wayback Machine to get some scores for other CPUs.

Since the KX-6000G scores so low, it was challenging to find a CPU that was made within the past decade for comparison. Among desktop CPUs, it was pretty similar to the Core 2 Quad Q6600, the FX-4100, and Phenom II and Athlon II chips, which are now pretty old, especially in the case of the 2007-era Q6600.

That being said, the KX-6000G has a TDP of 15 watts, well below the triple digit TDPs that the other desktop CPUs had. In that respect, Zhaoxin's CPU is more comparable to mobile CPUs from the mid-2010s, and the KX-6000G rests somewhere between the Core i3-4010U and the Core i3-5015U. To be clear, these are still pretty slow CPUs, but the difference is that they aren't nearly as old as similarly performant desktop CPUs. Instead of being nearly 20 years behind, Zhaoxin's KX-6000G is more like 10 years behind.

Zhaoxin's goal of course isn't to offer cutting-edge processors that can rival Intel, AMD, and others, but to give China a source of domestically-made CPUs that are good enough. That's not to say Zhaoxin is content with the performance of the KX-6000G though, as the company is working on launching its next generation KX-7000 series, which boast some significant upgrades over the KX-6000 and 6000G lineups. 

See more CPUs News
Matthew Connatser
Matthew Connatser

Matthew Connatser is a freelancing writer for Tom's Hardware US. He writes articles about CPUs, GPUs, SSDs, and computers in general.

15 Comments Comment from the forums
  • ThomasKinsley
    This must be what Pat Gelsinger meant when he said China is 10 years behind. This level of performance is old by any modern standard, but the pace of innovation is remarkable. If Zhaoxin learns how to properly scale up to higher tdp and add hyperthreading, then they could quickly reach 6th or 7th gen i7 performance, and that is definitely still useable today. I'd like to see more on the KX-7000's performance.
    Reply
  • TCA_ChinChin
    ThomasKinsley said:
    This must be what Pat Gelsinger meant when he said China is 10 years behind. This level of performance is old by any modern standard, but the pace of innovation is remarkable. If Zhaoxin learns how to properly scale up to higher tdp and add hyperthreading, then they could quickly reach 6th or 7th gen i7 performance, and that is definitely still useable today. I'd like to see more on the KX-7000's performance.
    The next 1-2 generations of Chinese chips and their improvment will be really interesting. They're about a decade behind in most aspects of processor design and fabrication, and it'll be cool to see where they end up.
    Reply
  • tomscomments
    Zhaoxin isn't the cpu china rely on most. That doesn't mean it won't be performant. They may have some bottlenecks like lithographie or drivers or test or whatever they want to leak. I think it is just a cpu X86 they need to have but i don't think they'll go for X86 CISC
    We make a mistake if we think zhaoxin is their battlehorse

    LoongArch is the mainstream cpu for China.
    Reply
  • TCA_ChinChin
    tomscomments said:
    Zhaoxin isn't the cpu china rely on most. That doesn't mean it won't be performant. They may have some bottlenecks like lithographie or drivers or test or whatever they want to leak. I think it is just a cpu X86 they need to have but i don't think they'll go for X86 CISC
    We make a mistake if we think zhaoxin is their battlehorse

    LoongArch is the mainstream cpu for China.
    I think LoongArch is also about 10-ish years behind their western analogues though. Maybe better than this Zhaoxin arch, I'd say they're pretty comparable.
    Reply
  • eric79xxl
    The thing that is evident in action, but not really talked about is how jank communist produced stuff is. We didn't really know it until after the cold War, but that Soviet equipment was total jank. Even if designed well, it's always built so poorly that it's not reliable. Look at Russia today, having to adopt tactics of the Ukrainians that were kicking their asses with drones.
    Chinese communist produced equipment is similarly of poor workmanship. Synthetic benchmarks of a prototype or early production are one thing - but the jury is still out on if they can achieve and maintain the quality level needed to power their entire country on their homegrown CPUs.
    Reply
  • DavidC1
    Though the CPU certainly isn't very fast, it does operate at such a low power level that might make it suitable for laptops, which would put it roughly between Intel's 4th Generation Haswell and 5th Generation Broadwell Core i3 CPUs. Treat the results with a pinch of salt.
    Why mislead?

    The Pentium Silver N5000 from 2016 that has 6W TDP performs much better than this.
    https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/20869323
    The performance is on par with a 2015 N4200 6W TDP:
    https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/21565847
    The modern N100 gets over 1000 in ST, meaning a single core Gracemont is equal to quad KX-6000.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    ThomasKinsley said:
    This must be what Pat Gelsinger meant when he said China is 10 years behind. This level of performance is old by any modern standard,
    These aren't even new CPUs by their standards. This microarchitecture appears to have launched way back in 2019:
    https://en.wikichip.org/wiki/zhaoxin/microarchitectures/lujiazui
    ThomasKinsley said:
    If Zhaoxin learns how to properly scale up to higher tdp and add hyperthreading
    These are client processors. They have an entirely different product line for server CPUs. Their next gen KX-7000 CPUs will feature 8 cores.

    As the last paragraph mentions, the 7000-series is on the cusp of launching. Those promise marked performance gains and that will be the real test.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    TCA_ChinChin said:
    They're about a decade behind in most aspects of processor design and fabrication, and it'll be cool to see where they end up.
    Where do you get a "decade"? SMIC allegedly has at least a 2nd generation 7 nm process (possibly better), which I think puts it only about 5 years behind TSMC.

    Of course, with the supply of lithography machinery now cut off, the key question is now whether they can stay only 5 years behind.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    eric79xxl said:
    not really talked about is how jank communist produced stuff is.
    In its economic system, China isn't really communist, though. It's basically a market economy with selective state supports.

    eric79xxl said:
    Chinese communist produced equipment is similarly of poor workmanship.
    Given the vast amount of tech & other products currently manufactured in China, I think we can safely say they know how to make stuff properly.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    DavidC1 said:
    The modern N100 gets over 1000 in ST, meaning a single core Gracemont is equal to quad KX-6000.
    True. Here's are GeekBench 5 results for N100:
    https://browser.geekbench.com/search?k=v5_cpu&q=N100
    Reply