Zhaoxin KaiXian x86 CPU Tested: The Rise of China's Chips

Zhaoxin KaiXian x86
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

China-based Zhaoxin Semiconductor, which roughly translates to 'million core,' has fielded a new eight-core KaiXian KX-U6780A processor based on its mysterious LuJiaZui microarchitecture and fabbed on TSMC's 16nm FinFET process. Chips based on the architecture bring a new level of performance to China's roster of homegrown chips that span from desktop PCs to servers, but the KX-6000 series is destined for gaming rigs, PCs, and office machines. Today we have the chip in for testing on Zhaoxin's HX002EH1 demo board to determine if it can rank among our list of best gaming CPUs.

Zhaoxin definitely isn't a household name, but it's one of the very few companies that designs bespoke x86 processors. That means it competes with the likes of dominant chip producers AMD and Intel, which is surprising given the patent-protected x86 instruction set and strict licensing agreements that have long narrowed the field of x86 chip producers to the Intel, AMD, and VIA triumvirate. Details are scarce, but the fabless Zhaoxin consists of a joint venture between the Shanghai Municipal Government, which invested 80% of the company's initial capital, and Taiwanese VIA Technologies, which provided 20%. This partnership structure purportedly allows Chinese government-controlled interests to design x86 processors while staying within the legal boundaries of licensing agreements. 

Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • nofanneeded
    China CPU making Potential is in the ARM not the X86 market ... their Huwawei Kirin ARM CPU is the thing not X86 Chips.
    Reply
  • alextheblue
    we're looking at roughly the same power draw, if not slightly less, than AMD's A10-9700 that's also fabbed on a 28nm process.

    Even with the somewhat unclear power results, we can clearly see the power burden bestowed by the older 28nm process.
    It seems you're implying both chips are fabbed on the same process. The first page says 16nm FinFET.
    Reply
  • Paul Alcorn
    alextheblue said:
    It seems you're implying both chips are fabbed on the same process. The first page says 16nm FinFET.

    Good eye, thanks Alex. Fixed.
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    Remember AMD's Phoenix-like rise from the relative ashes of the semiconductor market to the value and performance leader?


    I do. It only took one daring new architecture with a massive 52% IPC gain paired with a good-enough 14nm GlobalFoundries process, and perhaps a little bit of luck with Intel's delays on the 10nm node, to upset both the desktop PC and data center markets.


    Except AMD already had what they needed to meet Intel performance wise and their first step was a catch up after using a uArch that was just bad all around. Bulldozer launched to being beaten by K10.5 CPUs in some areas.

    You also have to consider that Intel and AMD had a big settlement a few years ago that allowed for cross patent sharing so AMD has a lot to work with to design.

    This CPU is extremely underwhelming and will probably only exist in the Chinese market or places that are too cheap to buy AMD or Intel.
    Reply
  • JarredWaltonGPU
    jimmysmitty said:
    Except AMD already had what they needed to meet Intel performance wise and their first step was a catch up after using a uArch that was just bad all around. Bulldozer launched to being beaten by K10.5 CPUs in some areas.

    You also have to consider that Intel and AMD had a big settlement a few years ago that allowed for cross patent sharing so AMD has a lot to work with to design.

    This CPU is extremely underwhelming and will probably only exist in the Chinese market or places that are too cheap to buy AMD or Intel.
    Zhaoxin is at least capable of making x86-64 CPUs, and there's been a pretty decent uplift in performance over its previous gen chip. Still a long way to go, sure, but I don't think closing the uarch gap is going to be that difficult -- especially if patents and licensing are ignored. I'm sure these chips violate hundreds of Intel and AMD patents, but proving that will be difficult, and as long as they remain a China-only product there's not much to be gained by AMD or Intel in trying to fight it.
    Reply
  • Dsplover
    What a kind review for a crappy chip.
    Can’t wait to see the excitement over the next major achievement...
    Reply
  • pug_s
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Zhaoxin is at least capable of making x86-64 CPUs, and there's been a pretty decent uplift in performance over its previous gen chip. Still a long way to go, sure, but I don't think closing the uarch gap is going to be that difficult -- especially if patents and licensing are ignored. I'm sure these chips violate hundreds of Intel and AMD patents, but proving that will be difficult, and as long as they remain a China-only product there's not much to be gained by AMD or Intel in trying to fight it.

    Zhaoxin exist only because China's contingency plans if they are not allowed to buy intel or AMD desktop processors. Thanks to Obama's and Trump's exclusion to buy US technologies, China's 2025 plans is to get away from US technologies in the next few years. In the next few years, the Chinese government will probably use some kind of Linux dist using Risc V chips utilizing open source software.
    Reply
  • Gurg
    For reference, performance in Fire Strike Physics is about 87% of the 7857 score generated by my old 2700K eight years ago.
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    JarredWaltonGPU said:
    Zhaoxin is at least capable of making x86-64 CPUs, and there's been a pretty decent uplift in performance over its previous gen chip. Still a long way to go, sure, but I don't think closing the uarch gap is going to be that difficult -- especially if patents and licensing are ignored. I'm sure these chips violate hundreds of Intel and AMD patents, but proving that will be difficult, and as long as they remain a China-only product there's not much to be gained by AMD or Intel in trying to fight it.

    It's an extremely long way to go. Its using more power and in a lot of cases giving half the performance of an i3.

    I don't see AMD or Intel fighting it but still even in China this will only sell well to basic users if that unless the government limits or stops sales from AMD and Intel. No one wants to pay money for a product thats that far behind.
    Reply
  • jonathan1683
    Raise your hand if you want a POS Chinese CPU.
    Reply