News New CPU from China's sole x86 chipmaker grapples with AMD's Bulldozer in Geekbench results — lower-end model isn't the fastest, but it gives Zhaoxi...

[Admin]

Zhaoxin's KX6640MA x86 processor has popped up on Geekbench 6, and it's about as good as AMD's old Bulldozer chips.

New CPU from China's sole x86 chipmaker grapples with AMD's Bulldozer in Geekbench results — lower-end model isn't the fastest, but it gives Zhaoxi... : Read more

 

[artk2219]

Zhaoxin's KX6640MA x86 processor has popped up on Geekbench 6, and it's about as good as AMD's old Bulldozer chips.

New CPU from China's sole x86 chipmaker grapples with AMD's Bulldozer in Geekbench results — lower-end model isn't the fastest, but it gives Zhaoxi... : Read more

That puts it around Nehalem IPC, thats pretty decent honestly, that definitely gets it into usable territory provided they can get some higher clocks.

 

[hotaru251]

the 1 amd name you don't want to be compared to >_<!

tbh im shocked china didn't try to push for arm/riscv advancement over x86.

 

[ivan_vy]

the 1 amd name you don't want to be compared to >_<!

tbh im shocked china didn't try to push for arm/riscv advancement over x86.

I would think for HW and SW compatibility/ecosystem.

 

[ivan_vy]

That puts it around Nehalem IPC, thats pretty decent honestly, that definitely gets it into usable territory provided they can get some higher clocks.

the article failed to mention the KX-6640MA has 25W TDP while the FX-4100 has 95W TDP.

 

[ingtar33]

That puts it around Nehalem IPC, thats pretty decent honestly, that definitely gets it into usable territory provided they can get some higher clocks.

no it does not. the 8130 was bulldozer, which was decidedly slower then nehalem. that was why it was called faildozer. the late gen phenomII cpus were about on par with stock Nehalem when overclocked, but bulldozer was a significant step BACKWARDS in performance from the Phenom II, hence "Faildozer"

Piledriver would be about on par if not slightly faster in some workloads with Nehalem (with both at stock), however when Piledriver launched Intel had already launched Sandybridge and Ivybridge was about to launch too.... and piledriver was not competitive with either.

 

[artk2219]

no it does not. the 8130 was bulldozer, which was decidedly slower then nehalem. that was why it was called faildozer. the late gen phenomII cpus were about on par with stock Nehalem when overclocked, but bulldozer was a significant step BACKWARDS in performance from the Phenom II, hence "Faildozer"

Piledriver would be about on par if not slightly faster in some workloads with Nehalem (with both at stock), however when Piledriver launched Intel had already launched Sandybridge and Ivybridge was about to launch too.... and piledriver was not competitive with either.

Correct, but its 2.2 - 2.6 Ghz vs 3.6 - 4Ghz for the 4100 which it is matching with a much lower clock speed, making its IPC much higher, placing maybe between Nehalem and Sandy Bridge in terms of IPC. Other chips in this performance range would be the Core 2 Quad Q9650 at 3Ghz, I5 - 760 clocking in at 2.8 - 3.3 Ghz, and Phenom II X4 965 at 3.4 Ghz. Thats a pretty huge improvement in IPC compared to their previous offerings, and would make that a generally useful web surfing chip.

 

[DavidC1]

That sounds nice until you realize that Tremont performs at the Ivy Bridge level and Gracemont is Skylake level.

According to Geekbench 6 results, Pentium Silver N5000 scores about 360 in ST and 1000 in MT at 2.7GHz clocks. Meaning Zhaoxin only about 10% faster than that chip. The N5000 performed around 45nm Penryn level so that makes sense.

N5000 used Intel's 14nm process while this chip uses "16nm" so TSMC. N5000 had only 6W TDP though.

10% makes it somewhere in the Nehalem range for ST as Nehalem was only a small gain for it if you normalize it(disable SMT and boost).

 

[George³]

Why does the title claim this is a new processor. This is not true, it is misleading and raises doubts that the article was released for political propaganda purposes. Although it is cleverly disguised with technical data and does not have characteristic political cliché expressions. And yes I read that in text is mentioned the real new series Zhaoxin KX-7000. In one sentence.

 

[frogr]

the article failed to mention the KX-6640MA has 25W TDP while the FX-4100 has 95W TDP.

FX-4100 is 32 nm. KX-6640MA is 16nm, thus the power difference.

 

[DavidC1]

FX-4100 is 32 nm. KX-6640MA is 16nm, thus the power difference.

So what? I just pointed out the 6W N5000 is Intel 14nm.

The Via chips used to be popular in low power devices. They aren't used anymore, because they aren't competitive. 4x power difference with mere 1 generation gap(in the best case scenario) is absolutely enormous. They would need to jump to N5 to have any chance of competing with the Intel 14nm N5000.

Bulldozer level of perf/clock is useless when people complain about Gracemont, the chip that's at least as good as Skylake!

And yes I read that in text is mentioned the real new series Zhaoxin KX-7000. In one sentence.

The 7000 series is faster but not enough:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/526995?baseline=458824

The N100 Gracemont at 3.4GHz scores 1200, meaning it's 50% faster per clock. So the previous generation Tremont is 12% faster than Zhaoxin 7000 per clock, not to mention the incomparable power advantage. You'd need to go down to Meteorlake's LP-E cores(which sip power) for somewhat ballpark performance. I hear even the LP-E cores clock in the 2.xGHz range meaning even that's significantly faster.

 

[George³]

So what? I just pointed out the 6W N5000 is Intel 14nm.

The Via chips used to be popular in low power devices. They aren't used anymore, because they aren't competitive. 4x power difference with mere 1 generation gap(in the best case scenario) is absolutely enormous. They would need to jump to N5 to have any chance of competing with the Intel 14nm N5000.

Bulldozer level of perf/clock is useless when people complain about Gracemont, the chip that's at least as good as Skylake!


The 7000 series is faster but not enough:
https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/526995?baseline=458824

The N100 Gracemont at 3.4GHz scores 1200, meaning it's 50% faster per clock. So the previous generation Tremont is 12% faster than Zhaoxin 7000 per clock, not to mention the incomparable power advantage. You'd need to go down to Meteorlake's LP-E cores(which sip power) for somewhat ballpark performance. I hear even the LP-E cores clock in the 2.xGHz range meaning even that's significantly faster.

This is something so old from first half of 2019. I think it's deep fake and it's not a KX-7000 at all.

 

[hotaru251]

I would think for HW and SW compatibility/ecosystem.

thats the thing...if they wanted to become independent they could easily of just became anti x86 and developed everything around arm/riscv.
Apple's shown that you can even use x86 on arm via translation.

 

[Avro Arrow]

It's not great but it's probably fine for everyday PC tasks. My mother's HTPC ran Windows 10 Pro just fine with an FX-8350 that isn't overclocked with an ancient XFX Radeon HD 6450 1GB video card on a 42" 1080p TV.

She recently upgraded to a 4K Sony OLED and it turned out that smooth 4K video was beyond the capabilities of the HD 6450. So, I popped in an RX 6500 XT that I managed to get as an open-box for well under $200CAD. I had to chuckle to myself as, for her use-case, the card performs beautifully, even though it's limited to PCIe2x4 on that old 990FX motherboard.

I was really surprised that the HD 6450 was usable for as long as it was since I bought it for her as a gift back in 2011. I would say that twelve years service from a video card that cost less than $100CAD at the time sure isn't bad.

 

[Albert.Thomas]

Everyone in the world already knows that the performance of the 6000 series is lacking, *yawn*

Wake me up when we have real news about the KX-7000 series

 

[Albert.Thomas]

Looks like there are some basic benchmarks out there for KX-7000:

https://wap.seccw.com/index.php/Index/detail/id/26830.html

If this SpecInt 2006 result is accurate, it's roughly equivalent to a Coffee Lake quad core.