# New High Performance, x86 Compatible Microprocessors from Centaur / VIA



## Tralalak (Sep 12, 2019)

*The new website has been uncovered new high performance, x86 Compatible microprocessors from Centaur / VIA.
source:* https://centtech.com


----------



## mbeeston (Sep 12, 2019)

i miss cyrix.


----------



## Disparia (Sep 12, 2019)

Cool. I had a Centaur WinChip 200 back in the day. Wasn't anything special except for being very cheap.


----------



## dyonoctis (Sep 12, 2019)

The fact that it's supposed to be fast, cheap, and energy efficient at the same time, sounds so good, that I doubt that it's actually "a new challenger" but rather something that's going to be a niche product for people who just need lots of x86 cpu...


----------



## Tralalak (Sep 15, 2019)

*New Chinese x86 Zhaoxin processor leaked. Next-gen architecture has IPC like Skylake / Zen 2*
*source:* https://translate.google.com/transl...-unik-geekbench-nova-architektura-vysoke-ipc/


----------



## TheLostSwede (Sep 15, 2019)

The Centaur guys are good at what they're doing, but unfortunately the funding from VIA is what's prevented them from bringing out some real competition.
That said, the Zhaoxin chips so far has been based on old Centaur tech, maybe these new ones will really manage to catch up. 
I know a few guys working at Centaur and I know they've been working on this for quite some time.
And yes, these chips will be socket compatible with Intel, but as such, they won't be sold outside of China.


----------



## Vayra86 (Sep 15, 2019)

Heh so that's the link between those chips huh. Interesting.


----------



## dyonoctis (Sep 15, 2019)

Tralalak said:


> *New Chinese x86 Zhaoxin processor leaked. Next-gen architecture has IPC like Skylake / Zen 2*
> *source:* https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=sk&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https://www.cnews.cz/procesor-via-zhaoxin-kx-7000-unik-geekbench-nova-architektura-vysoke-ipc/


Well f****. Unicorns are reals.


----------



## Splinterdog (Sep 15, 2019)

The last VIA CPU I saw was soldered to the motherboard, but it did manage to run XP, within reason.


----------



## Octopuss (Sep 16, 2019)

mbeeston said:


> i miss cyrix.


I don't. The 6x86 CPUs were pure garbage. I remember one game crashing upon launching because of a bug in the CPU.
I don't miss VIA either. I believe it was KT133 chipset that was bugged to oblivion as well.


----------



## trparky (Sep 16, 2019)

Octopuss said:


> I don't. The 6x86 CPUs were pure garbage. I remember one game crashing upon launching because of a bug in the CPU.
> I don't miss VIA either. I believe it was KT133 chipset that was bugged to oblivion as well.


I believe that was Quake, but it didn't crash; it did, however, run slow as all hell because it effectively had half the floating-point compute capacity when compared to the then Pentium chip.


----------



## Octopuss (Sep 16, 2019)

Didn't play Quake, but I'm not surprised it wasn't just one game. The CPUs were crap


----------



## R-T-B (Sep 16, 2019)

I remember trying to play Microsoft Flight Sim of some generation on a Cyrix thing...

It was really bad.


----------



## Tralalak (Oct 23, 2019)

*Centaur Technology's Deep-Learning Coprocessor Technology*
*source: http://www.ece.utexas.edu/events/ce...5DL_d1sa11HCDEU5OpZZ0UGeR0D3Aoa_sdB9FXdBusQog*


----------



## candle_86 (Oct 24, 2019)

The issue with the 686 is it's got alu performance that's better than p2 clock for clock but it's floating point module was the used in the 486 era, a non pipelined 32bit fp.


----------



## thesmokingman (Oct 24, 2019)

Octopuss said:


> I don't. The 6x86 CPUs were pure garbage. I remember one game crashing upon launching because of a bug in the CPU.
> I don't miss VIA either. I believe it was KT133 chipset that was bugged to oblivion as well.



To be fair they were pretty darn smart ppl given that they created an x86 cpu from scratch and reverse engineering. That didn't stop Intel from litigating them to death lol.


----------



## Octopuss (Oct 25, 2019)

Oh, it was an Intel ripoff? I had no idea 

Interestingly, Cyrix won most/all of the time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix#Legal_troubles


----------



## R0H1T (Oct 25, 2019)

I don't remember any of this, probably because Cyrix was just before my time


----------



## GorbazTheDragon (Oct 25, 2019)

Maybe my bogus R15 score will become a reality one day...


----------



## thesmokingman (Oct 25, 2019)

Octopuss said:


> Oh, it was an Intel ripoff? I had no idea
> 
> Interestingly, Cyrix won most/all of the time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyrix#Legal_troubles



Yeap. That's why Intel lost most of the time because their designs didn't come from Intel. And since they were fabless that also insulated them as well.


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 4, 2019)

*CentaurHauls Family 6 Model 71 Stepping 1*
*ZHAOXIN KX-7000 ZX-F OctaCore 2000MHz @ 2.00 GHz
1 processor, 8 cores*


L1 Instruction Cache: 32 KB x 8
L1 Data Cache: 32 KB x 8
L2 Cache: 256 KB x 8
L3 Cache: 16 MB x 1


*Single-Core Performance*
Single-Core Score: *469*
Crypto Score: 710
Integer Score: 446
Floating Point Score: 478

*Multi-Core Performance*
Multi-Core Score: *3 264*
Crypto Score: 4 553
Integer Score: 3 133
Floating Point Score: 3 334


*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/526995
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/526995.gb5


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 7, 2019)

Tralalak said:


> *Centaur Technology's Deep-Learning Coprocessor Technology*
> *source: http://www.ece.utexas.edu/events/ce...5DL_d1sa11HCDEU5OpZZ0UGeR0D3Aoa_sdB9FXdBusQog*



*Centaur Technology Reference Design v1.0 (8-core Centaur Integrated x86 CPUs @ 2.5GHz with Centaur Integrated AI Coprocessor)*
*source:* https://mlperf.org/inference-results
*source:* https://www.cdrinfo.com/d7/content/mlperf-releases-results-machine-learning-inference-benchmark


```
{
    "division": "closed",
    "status": "preview",
    "submitter": "CentaurTechnology",
    "system_name": "Centaur Technology Reference Design v1.0",
    "number_of_nodes": 1,
    "host_memory_capacity": "32GB",
    "host_processor_core_count": 8,
    "host_processor_frequency": "2.5GHz",
    "host_processor_model_name": "Centaur Integrated x86 CPUs",
    "host_processors_per_node": 1,
    "host_storage_capacity": "120GB",
    "host_storage_type": "SSD",
    "accelerator_frequency": "-",
    "accelerator_host_interconnect": "-",
    "accelerator_interconnect": "-",
    "accelerator_interconnect_topology": "-",
    "accelerator_memory_capacity": "4GB",
    "accelerator_memory_configuration": "none",
    "accelerator_model_name": "Centaur Integrated AI Coprocessor",
    "accelerator_on-chip_memories": "-",
    "accelerators_per_node": 1,
    "framework": "TensorFlow commit f5ce1c00d4397875ff3d706881bd46430f4a9667 and f6fbfe013898dc16bd35ba380387ff02d0275ac3 + custom patches",
    "operating_system": "ubuntu-18.04",
    "other_software_stack": "Centaur ML Library Build 1223 and 1220",
    "sw_notes": "The same hardware system is used for all mobilenet, resnet, ssd-small, and gnmt sumbissions, but the software is slightly different for gnmt. 
Submissions for mobilenet, resnet, and ssd-small use TF commit f5ce1c00d4397875ff3d706881bd46430f4a9667 + custom patches to TF-Lite, 
Centaur ML Library Build 1223, and host_processor_frequency set to 2.5GHz. Submissions for gnmt use TF commit f6fbfe013898dc16bd35ba380387ff02d0275ac3 
+ custom patches for compiler/graph matching, Centaur ML Library Build 1220, and host_processor_frequency set at runtime via software to 2.3GHz."
}
```
*source: https://github.com/mlperf/inference_results_v0.5/blob/master/closed/CentaurTechnology/systems/0.json*


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 9, 2019)

*The Geekbench already has a 2GHz sample of the Chinese x86 Zhaoxin KX-7000 processor. 80% IPC Zen 2

source:* https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=sk&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https://www.cnews.cz/procesor-via-zhaoxin-kx-7000-unik-geekbench-2ghz/


*AMD FX-8300 3300MHz @ 2.00GHz
Single-Core Score: 306 (65,25%)
Multi-Core Score: 1 705 (52,24%)


vs


KX-7000 ZX-F OctaCore 2000MHz @ 2.00GHz
Single-Core Score: 469 (+53,27%)
Multi-Core Score: 3 264 (+91,44%)


source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/526995?baseline=562975


___________________




*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/562975.gb5
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/562975

*P.S. If you have Geekbench 5 results your modern CPU @ 2.00GHz so pls write here! Thank you.*


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 11, 2019)

*Making a Microprocessor: Centaur Technology *



__ https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=530671834177833


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 17, 2019)

*MLPerf Inference v0.5 Results 
source: https://mlperf.org/inference-results*


*COCO object detection on SSD-MobileNet v1 (images/sec)**Intel Core i3-1005G1 1.2GHz up to 3.4GHz Ice Lake 2C/4T (Intel® UHD Graphics)*217,93*33,43 %**Centaur Integrated x86 CPUs @ 2.5GHz~2.3GHz 8C/8T (Centaur Integrated AI Coprocessor)*651,89*299,13 %**ImageNet image classification on MobileNet v1 (images/sec)**images/sec**Intel Core i3-1005G1 1.2GHz up to 3.4GHz Ice Lake 2C/4T (Intel® UHD Graphics)*507,71*8,40 %**Centaur Integrated x86 CPUs @ 2.5GHz~2.3GHz 8C/8T (Centaur Integrated AI Coprocessor)*6 042,34*1190,12 %**ImageNet image classification on ResNet-50 v1.5, (images/sec)**Intel Core i3-1005G1 1.2GHz up to 3.4GHz Ice Lake 2C/4T (Intel® UHD Graphics)*100,93*8,28 %**Centaur Integrated x86 CPUs @ 2.5GHz~2.3GHz 8C/8T (Centaur Integrated AI Coprocessor)*1 218,48*1207,25 %*


_*source: *_https://mlperf.org/inference-results_*source: *_https://github.com/mlperf/inference...osed/Intel/systems/ICL-i31005G1_openvino.json_*source:*_ https://www.intel.ai/mlperf-nov2019/#gs.h01eu8
_*source: *_https://github.com/mlperf/inference_results_v0.5/blob/master/closed/CentaurTechnology/systems/0.json


----------



## Jism (Nov 17, 2019)

Didnt they had IP from zen 1?


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 17, 2019)

Jism said:


> Didnt they had IP from zen 1?


Why would you say that? This isn't Hygon Dhyana CPU.
Centaur is the guys behind the CPU here and they're based in Austin, whereas AMD is based in Santa Clara. AMD does have a campus not too far from Centaur though.


----------



## TheLostSwede (Nov 18, 2019)

A bit of an update from Centaur about their latest hardware.


> Centaur Technology revealed the technology behind its outstanding results on the MLPerf1 inference benchmarks, which were officially certified on a development system for key customers and software developers. Centaur’s first design with its new artificial intelligence (AI) technology combines eight new server-class x86 CPU cores with a 20 tera-operations-per-second (TOPS) coprocessor optimized for inference applications in server, cloud and edge products. Centaur’s system-on-a-chip (SoC) technology allows users to save substantial cost and power over systems that require both an x86 host processor and external AI accelerators.













						Site Offline
					






					centtech.com


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 18, 2019)

*THE INDUSTRY’S FIRST HIGH-PERFORMANCE X86 SOC WITH SERVER-CLASS CPUS AND INTEGRATED AI COPROCESSOR TECHNOLOGY*

Codename "NCORE", SoC called "CHA" and x86 core "CNS".

• Centaur developed a new x86 microprocessor with high instructions/clock (IPC)
• Microarchitecture designed for server-class applications with extensions such as AVX-512
• New x86 technology now proven in silicon with 8 CPU cores and 16MB L3 caches
• SoC architecture provides an extensible platform with 44 PCIe lanes and 4 channels of PC3200
• Including AI coprocessor, requires less than 195mm2
in 16nm TSMC
• Reference platform running at 2.5GHz today
• Simultaneous execution of x86 cores and 20 TOPS AI Coprocessor
• Delivers 20 peak terabytes/sec to AI Coprocessor from dedicated 16MB SRAM
AI Coprocessor is 34.4mm2 in 16FFC.

Microprocessor Report article will be released on December 2, 2019. This report will be a deep dive into the technical details.

*source:* https://centtech.com/ai-technology/
*source:* https://centtech.com/wp-content/uploads/November-18-2019-press-release-1.pdf
*source:* https://centtech.com/wp-content/uploads/PRSlides_1118_Release.pdf

___________________
*EDIT: *

*VIA CenTaur Develops a Multi-core x86 Processor for Enterprise with in-built AI Hardware*
*source: https://www.techpowerup.com/261274/...enterprise-with-in-built-ai-hardware#comments*


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 20, 2019)

*Demo system with new x86 CPU & AI coprocessor @ ISC East in New York!*

__
		http://instagr.am/p/B5GCSZkhrL2/


----------



## Tralalak (Dec 3, 2019)

*Centaur Adds AI to Server Processor*
*source:* https://www.linleygroup.com/newsletters/newsletter_detail.php?num=6099


----------



## lexluthermiester (Dec 3, 2019)

I hope these folks do well. The market could use more competition to promote innovation.


----------



## Tralalak (Dec 9, 2019)

*Centaur Unveils Its New Server-Class x86 Core: CNS; Adds AVX-512*
*source:* https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/3099/centaur-unveils-its-new-server-class-x86-core-cns-adds-avx-512/


*View Microprocessor Report. This report deep dives into the technical details.
source:* https://centtech.com/wp-content/uploads/MPR_19_12_02_Centaur_Adds_AI_to_Server_Processor.pdf


*The core µarch and design choices sound quite nice. At least from a technological point of view Centaur seems to be back.*


----------



## Tralalak (Dec 11, 2019)

*Zhaoxin unveils next-generation general-purpose processor design specifications*


*Kaisheng 16nm KH-40000 up to 64 cores, DDR4, PCIe 3.0 (officially launched in 2021)*
*Kaixian 7nm KX-7000 SoC with DX12 IGPU*
*source:* http://www.zhaoxin.com/InCenterContent.aspx?id=282


----------



## Tralalak (Dec 14, 2019)

*Centaur CNS x86 for VIA / Zhaoxin processors. Haswell or Zen level performance?*
*source:* https://translate.google.com/transl...ha-cpu-jadro-architektura-cns-detaily-rozbor/

The core µarch and design choices sound quite nice. At least from a technological point of view Centaur seems to be back. The core µarch and design choices sound quite nice. At least from a technological point of view Centaur seems to be back. Apparently the first customer is Zhaoxin as join-venture company with VIA Technologies.


----------



## Tralalak (Dec 30, 2019)

* CPU-Z 1.91 with support of new Centaur CPU*
This version also adds the preliminary support of the new Centaur x86 CPU with the AI coprocessor that was announced recently.
*source:* https://www.cpuid.com/news.html


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 17, 2020)

*x86 CPU Design House Centaur Technology will host an AMA next week, Thursday Jan 23, 2020 @ 12:00pm-3:00pm CST


Come ask Centaur Technology about how they design x86 CPU's and their new AI co-processor. Centaur engineers will be answering the questions.

source:*

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/ep0lf4


----------



## kapone32 (Jan 17, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *The Geekbench already has a 2GHz sample of the Chinese x86 Zhaoxin KX-7000 processor. 80% IPC Zen 2
> 
> source:* https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=sk&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https://www.cnews.cz/procesor-via-zhaoxin-kx-7000-unik-geekbench-2ghz/
> 
> ...



Why would they run an FX at 1/2 its base speed?


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 17, 2020)

kapone32 said:


> Why would they run an FX at 1/2 its base speed?



That's how you test IPC.


----------



## kapone32 (Jan 17, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> That's how you test IPC.


 Ok got it


----------



## candle_86 (Jan 18, 2020)

I'm glad their back it's been a two horse race since 1999, with via just hanging out in thin clients connecting to vms. 

We used to have options though.


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 18, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> I'm glad their back it's been a two horse race since 1999, with via just hanging out in thin clients connecting to vms.
> 
> We used to have options though.


if we give them a few more years we can hope they bring something to client systems, they do need more speed though, and comparing to my old FX that was the butt of many a joke about it's IPC specifically doesn't really impress me, that said at higher resolutions and with adequate graphics power it could piss crisis and most AAA's out today at 60fps 1440p or 4k I would imagine so at the right price who knows what market they could gain if they tried.

it would get depressing fps comparatively to a modern AMD or Intel system at 720p or 1080p


----------



## Assimilator (Jan 18, 2020)

LOL, Geekbench.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 18, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> I'm glad their back it's been a two horse race since 1999


Not really..


candle_86 said:


> We used to have options though.


.. still do. Most of all the computers on the planet run on ARM CPU's anyway. There are tons of choices.


----------



## Deleted member 193706 (Jan 18, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> .. still do. Most of all the computers* mobile devices* on the planet run on ARM CPU's anyway. There are tons of choices.


FTFY

Yes they are technically computing devices but still not really in the same market space as desktops/laptops etc


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 18, 2020)

r9370 said:


> FTFY


I'm not up on "leetspeek". Care to translate?


r9370 said:


> Yes they are technically computing devices but still not really in the same market space as desktops/laptops etc


Yes, mobile devices ARE fully functional computers. And as more people have a mobile device as a primary computing device than a PC or notebook, my point is valid within the context of that "market space" perspective.


----------



## Deleted member 193706 (Jan 18, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> I'm not up on "leetspeek". Care to translate?
> 
> Yes, mobile devices ARE fully functional computers. And as more people have a mobile device as a primary computing device than a PC or notebook, *my point is valid.*


Actually not it's not, you're talking symantics yes mobiles are "computers" but the OP is about x86 microprocessors which are predominantly used in desktop computers, laptops, servers etc not cell phones otherwise we could mention Samsung and huawei in the same breath as being just as relevant to the discussion which of course they're not.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 18, 2020)

r9370 said:


> being just as relevant to the discussion which of course they're not.


Sure they are. Mobile devices are not modular like PC's, but then neither are laptops anymore. However, buyers still have a great deal of choice as to what CPU/GPU combinations they can get in mobile device much like PC's. It is not symantics, it is valid choice and a wide variety of such. If your perspective and focus is too narrow to see the bigger picture, YOU have the problem.


----------



## Deleted member 193706 (Jan 18, 2020)

You're arguing about mobile CPU's/SOC's in a thread about x86 and desktop processors, I'm not saying they aren't computing devices or CPU's but it's apples to oranges, anyway, this is taking the OP off topic so yea...


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 18, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> I'm glad their back it's been a two horse race since 1999,


 Its NEVER BEEN A TWO HORSE RACE 
More of a Horse v Pony Race....


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 18, 2020)

r9370 said:


> You're arguing about mobile CPU's/SOC's in a thread about x86 and desktop processors


That is because some mobile devices contain X86 CPU's. Laptop's contain X86 CPU's and are not modular like PC's. The statement made above by Candle_86 is that the industry has been a "two horse race since 1999". This has never been true, especially today. Additionally, there are many ARM CPU's that are considered very high performance and are currently being used in desktop applications. Your perspective is too narrow.


----------



## candle_86 (Jan 19, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> That is because some mobile devices contain X86 CPU's. Laptop's contain X86 CPU's and are not modular like PC's. The statement made above by Candle_86 is that the industry has been a "two horse race since 1999". This has never been true, especially today. Additionally, there are many ARM CPU's that are considered very high performance and are currently being used in desktop applications. Your perspective is too narrow.



Arm is worthless for servers and Enterprise except on phones. To many custom in house programs written by guys that are no longer with companies, to much legacy software or even current software that isn't compatabile. Arm can't emulate x86_64 period and is slow at x86, I wouldn't want to had people desktops for accounting running on arm, when they already are needing xeon precisions.

It's the reason the iPad pro failed, the software isn't full featured and the compute to slow for real work.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

Meanwhile, ARM64 has deprecated ARM for almost a half decade now and you two are still talking about ARM like it's limitations are relevant.


----------



## Durvelle27 (Jan 19, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *The Geekbench already has a 2GHz sample of the Chinese x86 Zhaoxin KX-7000 processor. 80% IPC Zen 2
> 
> source:* https://translate.google.com/translate?hl=sk&sl=cs&tl=en&u=https://www.cnews.cz/procesor-via-zhaoxin-kx-7000-unik-geekbench-2ghz/
> 
> ...


Where did you get 80% Zen IPC when testing against a old crappy Vishera processor which is know to have terrible IPC


----------



## candle_86 (Jan 19, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> Meanwhile, ARM64 has deprecated ARM for almost a half decade now and you two are still talking about ARM like it's limitations are relevant.



It is still relevant, your forgetting x86 and it's extensions are already running on risc using a cisc frontend to Port the code to microinstructions. When arm is as fast as current CPUs it will also be as large and complex, while sucking just as much power negating every advantage while still having the disadvantage of emulating x86 code at a 30-50% penalty. They can't emulate in hardware because they don't have a license so software emulation is required which will always be a big hit.

The only companies that could emulate x86 in hardware are AMD, Intel, and via and none of them are interested.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> When arm is as fast as current CPUs it will also be as large and complex, while sucking just as much power negating every advantage while still having the disadvantage of emulating x86 code at a 30-50% penalty.



Why in the world would a server environment bother with emulation?

They usually run linux or open source software and they'd just recompile to target arm.

No, emulation is never going to replace native x86 in the desktop, but I mean...  duh.  No one said that.  That's why compile targets exist.


----------



## candle_86 (Jan 19, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> Why in the world would a server environment bother with emulation?
> 
> They usually run linux or open source software and they'd just recompile to target arm.
> 
> No, emulation is never going to replace native x86 in the desktop, but I mean...  duh.  No one said that.  That's why compile targets exist.



but again legacy programs that you no longer have the original creator for or necessary software that is no longer updated because that company is out of bussiness. Meaning you either emulate it on ARM or run it on real hardware. ARM will never gain more than a footnote in server or desktop spaces, its best suited to lower power devices like phones and tablets, leave real work to X86


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 19, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> The only companies that could emulate x86 in hardware are AMD, Intel, and via and none of them are interested.


Transmeta did a form of emulation with their Crusoe processor through their software layer called code morphing.



			
				Wikipedia said:
			
		

> Code Morphing Software consisted of an interpreter, a runtime system and a dynamic binary translator. x86 instructions were first interpreted one instruction at a time and profiled, then depending upon the frequency of execution of a code block, CMS would progressively generate more optimized translations


Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transmeta



candle_86 said:


> ARM will never gain more than a footnote in server or desktop spaces, its best suited to lower power devices like phones and tablets, leave real work to X86


ARM could replace X86 as time moves on, and no one (the vast majority) would care or even know. Your way to quick to write off ARM as incapable of competing with X86.


----------



## seronx (Jan 19, 2020)

Durvelle27 said:


> Where did you get 80% Zen IPC when testing against a old crappy Vishera processor which is know to have terrible IPC





			Gigabyte Technology Co., Ltd. AX370-Gaming K7 vs Shanghai Zhaoxin Semiconductor Co., Ltd. CHA001 MB  - Geekbench Browser
		

CatMerc's AMD's Zen2 8c/16t @ 2 GHz
vs
Zhaoxin's ZX-F 8c/8t @ 2 GHz

Single-threaded => 77% of Zen2 @ 2 GHz
Multi-threaded => 60% of 3700X @ 2 GHz

Should be noted that the ZX-F is an APU-equivelent.  So, it's closest competitor would be the Ryzen 7 4700u(8c/8t/7CU).


----------



## notb (Jan 19, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> Arm is worthless for servers and Enterprise except on phones.


Your main mistake is probably thinking about servers as general-use machines - kind of like large PCs.
So maybe you'd like to run some Windows VMs on them or whatever.

In reality though, large servers are usually run as purpose-built machines - designed for a particular task or system (file storage, database, ERP, engineering computations, networking...).
So it doesn't really matter that all software in the world doesn't work on ARM. It's really enough that the one application you need does.

And in micro servers (because those tiny machines with 2-core Pentiums also matter) ARM's are perfectly sufficient.

Also, don't underestimate popularity of ARM (both in available software and among programmers).
Think about RPi and similar platforms. For people learning coding today (especially for science or engineering) ARM is a very natural choice. They don't feel limited.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

candle_86 said:


> but again legacy programs that you no longer have the original creator for or necessary software that is no longer updated because that company is out of bussiness. Meaning you either emulate it on ARM or run it on real hardware.



This is a very strange use case and usually will not require a lot of horsepower.



biffzinker said:


> ARM could replace X86 as time moves on, and no one (the vast majority) would care or even know.



Yep.  This is exactly how Apple killed PowerPC.


----------



## notb (Jan 19, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> Yep.  This is exactly how Apple killed PowerPC.


Very different use case.
Mac owners are generally very feature-oriented, rational. They expect certain things to work out of box (and they're willing to pay).
So as long as Macs work and are easy to work with, Apple customers don't really give a f... what's inside.

PC owners (especially on desktops) are more performance-oriented. They care about benchmarks, about parts inside.
And, sadly, there isn't a "governing body" that guarantees software compatibility (or quality, looks...).

Moving from x86 to another architecture on PCs would be a huge pain.

On servers, at least those deployed as full solutions (where a provider gives you software and hardware) - it happens all the time (between mainframe and x86, ARM will join)


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

notb said:


> Very different use case.



I know.  My point was more if manufacturers wanted to force arm on consumers they could.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 19, 2020)

biffzinker said:


> Your way to quick to write off ARM as incapable of competing with X86.


I don't think that is what RTB is they are saying, mostly because it already is.


----------



## dorsetknob (Jan 19, 2020)

Intel does not compete in the Ultra low Power stakes ....That is the ARM Strong point.
Intel has Tried but soon exited those markets.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

dorsetknob said:


> Intel does not compete in the Ultra low Power stakes ....That is the ARM Strong point.
> Intel has Tried but soon exited those markets.



X86 tends to have a hard time there, but I'm sure it could be done with enough effort.  At that point though the core instructions would be so stripped down you may as well just choose something else.


----------



## biffzinker (Jan 19, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> I don't think that is what RTB is saying, mostly because it already is.


That was a reply to @candle_86 NOT @R-T-B


----------



## Assimilator (Jan 19, 2020)

It's pretty obvious (and has been for years) that Apple hopes to transition its entire ecosystem, including desktop, to ARM. It's a viable strategy because most Mac users just want expensive shiny things with a particular brand name stamped on, so they won't even notice ARM's lower IPC. If ARM ever makes it further than mobile phones and ultraportables, it will be due to Apple, not Qualcomm or Amazon or all these weird Chinese companies trying to make ARM work in the server space.


----------



## notb (Jan 19, 2020)

dorsetknob said:


> Intel does not compete in the Ultra low Power stakes ....That is the ARM Strong point.
> Intel has Tried but soon exited those markets.


I wouldn't really say Intel exited low power market. They have quite a few ~5W SoCs.
Yes, they aren't investing in the ~2W range, but not because of performance (Atoms were quite good), but because of production cost. There weren't competitive against cheap ARM.

Anyway, we should call Intel quite resilient. AMD stopped developing Geode around 2008. 



Assimilator said:


> It's pretty obvious (and has been for years) that Apple hopes to transition its entire ecosystem, including desktop, to ARM. It's a viable strategy because most Mac users just want expensive shiny things with a particular brand name stamped on


I'm not sure where your opinion about Apple customers comes from. I assure you it's incorrect.
Apple users want performance as much as everyone. It's just that in their case this performance has a purpose, i.e. they focus on stuff other than running benchmarks. 

We don't have ARM CPUs that could replace Intel's high-end mobile lineup - let alone Xeons in Mac Pro.
If such CPUs ever appear, Apple may try to move.
But given how much x86 gave Apple in the way of software availability, IMO they'll just go for custom x86 CPUs. They can pay Intel or AMD to make them. Or they can just buy AMD.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 19, 2020)

notb said:


> AMD stopped developing Geode around 2008.



I mean, did they develop it at all, really?  Or just acquire and murder it?



notb said:


> Or they can just buy AMD.



Pretty sure the base x86 license does not survive a buyout.

Of course, Apply may not even NEED x86 support.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 19, 2020)

biffzinker said:


> That was a reply to @candle_86 NOT @R-T-B


Oops, my bad. I was agreeing with you and even expanding on the idea. ARM is already competing and even out pacing X86 is some area's.


----------



## Vya Domus (Jan 19, 2020)

biffzinker said:


> ARM could replace X86 as time moves on, and no one (the vast majority) would care or even know. Your way to quick to write off ARM as incapable of competing with X86.



Everyone sort of misses the point, ARM itself is just a collection of licenses to a variety of architectures. ARM doesn't compete directly with anyone, the companies that use those licenses are the ones that could compete with x86 licensed products.

The concept of "ARM vs x86" doesn't really make sense in the real world because that's not really what matters. Here's the thing, ARM do not have dedicated designs made directly for HPC/desktop applications, Intel and AMD do, that's a fact. So no company can just pick up their designs and begin competing with AMD or Intel, it's simply not possible. What they have to do, is come up with their own designs, at which point "ARM" is essentially reduced to just an ISA and the effort of coming up with something competitive falls on said company. That endeavour is colossal without ARM's direct interest in developing architectures for those purposes because you need to construct your product from scratch.

But ARM doesn't even have an interest in competing with x86, they have an interest in selling as many licenses as possible and it turns out that mobile is where they can do that most effectively. Unless they ever change their mind, we're likely never going see ARM competing directly with x86 products in any meaningful manner. Huawei, Amazon and a few other are trying to do that but long term I don't think it's going to go anywhere because it's not a coherent effort.


----------



## E-Bear (Jan 20, 2020)

The last Via cpu I had was a 1ghz soldered on a pc-chips motherboard.


----------



## trparky (Jan 20, 2020)

notb said:


> Atoms were quite good


What are you talking about? The Atom chips were garbage in the performance department.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 20, 2020)

trparky said:


> What are you talking about? The Atom chips were garbage in the performance department.


When compared to mainstream desktop CPU's sure, but for what they were intended to be, they performed very well. I still have my ASUS EEEPC with an Atom N330 and NVidia Ion and it still performs well.


----------



## Deleted member 67555 (Jan 20, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> I remember trying to play Microsoft Flight Sim of some generation on a Cyrix thing...
> 
> It was really bad.


They played Wing Commander 4 just fine...so they were good enough for me. ( in 1996)


----------



## trparky (Jan 20, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> When compared to mainstream desktop CPU's sure, but for what they were intended to be, they performed very well.


I remember the netbooks that they were in, they ran like hot garbage. Windows XP was the only operating system that even came close to running decent on it and to say that was a stretch.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 20, 2020)

trparky said:


> I remember the netbooks that they were in, they ran like hot garbage. Windows XP was the only operating system that even came close to running decent on it and to say that was a stretch.


The one's that only came with 1GB of RAM, sure. If you upgraded the ram to 2, 3 or 4GB and put in a faster HDD or an SSD they ran fine. Try to remember, Atoms were effectively updated and enhanced PentiumM's. when a user took the time to make XP lean and clean, it ran well. Mine came with 7 that also ran well after some optimizations.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 20, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Atoms were effectively updated and enhanced PentiumM's



More like 486 in lineage.  They actaully took design cues from there in the early versions for energy efficiency reasons.

The early ones didn't even have out of order execution. That is not a coincidence.  Neither did the 486.


----------



## notb (Jan 20, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> I mean, did they develop it at all, really?  Or just acquire and murder it?


Well, they did launch a few new chips apart from just rebranding what they took over. That's development in my book. 


> Pretty sure the base x86 license does not survive a buyout.


I don't know a reason why it would not (much like any other IP).
Either way, there are other ways to merge companies. 


trparky said:


> What are you talking about? The Atom chips were garbage in the performance department.


They definitely weren't.
Sure, if you compare them to mainstream PC CPUs, they were slow. But should we be surprised? Chips that went into tablets and netbooks used around 2W under load and hardly anything in idle. Even the top Raspberry Pi need more.
If you compared 5W lineup (Celeron/Pentium) to 35W Core models, you'd likely be disappointed as well.

For multiple use cases (mini servers, IoT, low-end NASes) these Atoms worked perfectly fine.


----------



## R-T-B (Jan 20, 2020)

notb said:


> I don't know a reason why it would not (much like any other IP).



Because that's how the agreement is written out IIRC.


----------



## Liquid Cool (Jan 20, 2020)

I never owned/purchased a Cyrix chip...and I hardly remember that era of my life, but I do remember that no one in my group would touch a Cyrix chip.  They were slower, cheaper Intel knock offs.   

I do remember my 486 DX2 66 though...it was my favorite pc.  Still is.  I purchased every part from...The Computer Shopper because we didn't have any good companies locally to purchase from.  I was a sysadmin of a BBS back in those days.

I'm also not remembering Via as a processor.  I only remember the Via chipset and I'm sure there is a reason for it that I can't recall at the moment....but I do have fond memories of the Via chipset.

Best,

Liquid Cool


----------



## Frick (Jan 20, 2020)

notb said:


> For multiple use cases (mini servers, IoT, low-end NASes) these Atoms worked perfectly fine.



Perhaps, but people generally only came in contact with them with said awful netbooks and they were awful even with XP. They sipped power sure, but that hardly matter if you can't even browse the web without going insane. Some lightweight linux distros were sorta fine on them, but I still _really_ didn't like those things. There were even desktops with Atoms in them.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 20, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> More like 486 in lineage.


Nope. Pentium3 -> PentiumM-> Atom


----------



## Frick (Jan 20, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Nope. Pentium3 -> PentiumM-> Atom



Wikipedia on Bonnell:

The Bonnell microarchitecture therefore represents a partial revival of the principles used in earlier Intel designs such as P5 and the i486, with the sole purpose of enhancing the performance per watt ratio. 

Such as lack of speculative execution. Maybe that's what he'stalking about?


----------



## lexluthermiester (Jan 20, 2020)

Frick said:


> Wikipedia on Bonnell:
> 
> The Bonnell microarchitecture therefore represents a partial revival of the principles used in earlier Intel designs such as P5 and the i486, with the sole purpose of enhancing the performance per watt ratio.
> 
> Such as lack of speculative execution. Maybe that's what he'stalking about?


Very likely. It's a little more fine-grained than just lumping the Atom in with one series or another, but at their core, Atom had a lot more in common with the Pentium3/PentiumM than with any of the 486 line.
(BTW, thanks for pointing that out, I read up on more detail aspects of the Atom line and learned a few more things I didn't know before.)


----------



## trparky (Jan 20, 2020)

notb said:


> They definitely weren't.


I witnessed some of those netbooks (with Atoms) back in the day, they were godawfully slow. Like @Frick said, browsing the Internet on them made you want to tear your hair out. I still to this day wonder why the hell Intel came out with such hot garbage, every person I knew that had one of those complained about them and damn near wanted to chuck them out their window.


----------



## Frick (Jan 20, 2020)

trparky said:


> I witnessed some of those netbooks (with Atoms) back in the day, they were godawfully slow. Like @Frick said, browsing the Internet on them made you want to tear your hair out. I still to this day wonder why the hell Intel came out with such hot garbage, every person I knew that had one of those complained about them and damn near wanted to chuck them out their window.



They were cheap, that's why they sold. Good idea, but less good excecution.


----------



## trparky (Jan 20, 2020)

Frick said:


> They were cheap, that's why they sold.


I don't know, when something's _that_ cheap I start to question why.


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 22, 2020)

*[Fun Technology] Domestic CPU draws i5-7400? Zhaoxin KX-U6780A first evaluation! The rise of China's core! *


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 23, 2020)

*Centaur Technology started answering your questions @ www.reddit.com


CPU-Z screenshot*


http://imgur.com/UU96AOP


*Windows 10 screenshot*


http://imgur.com/EgPKzRK


*source: *

__
		https://www.reddit.com/r/hardware/comments/ep0lf4


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Jan 23, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *Centaur Technology started answering your questions @ www.reddit.com
> 
> 
> CPU-Z screenshot*
> ...


Looks worth a watch, hopefully my prime free month hasn't ran out yet.


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 24, 2020)

*Centaur New x86 Server Processor Packs an AI Punch*
*source:* https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/3256/centaur-new-x86-server-processor-packs-an-ai-punch/

*[Self-Category] Is a new generation of domestic CPUs and motherboards ready to enter the DIY market? How about the performance of Zhaoxin ’s new flagship KX-6780A and Xinyingjie C1888 motherboards?*

[YT]


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jan 29, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *Centaur New x86 Server Processor Packs an AI Punch*
> *source:* https://fuse.wikichip.org/news/3256/centaur-new-x86-server-processor-packs-an-ai-punch/
> 
> *[Self-Category] Is a new generation of domestic CPUs and motherboards ready to enter the DIY market? How about the performance of Zhaoxin ’s new flagship KX-6780A and Xinyingjie C1888 motherboards?*
> ...


Just heard that the Zhaoxin is using a Centaur core from 2012 with some tweaks to it to make it perform a bit better.
However, it's not something worth trying to get hold of, as it's not going to impress.
Anandtech just threw up some pictures of the Chinese board.








						Zhaoxin’s x86-Compatible CPUs for DIY Enthusiasts Now Available
					






					www.anandtech.com


----------



## R0H1T (Jan 29, 2020)

This could be a big move especially if CCP push for "homegrown" x86 variants for their domestic market!


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 29, 2020)

TheLostSwede said:


> Just heard that the Zhaoxin is using a Centaur core from 2012 with some tweaks to it to make it perform a bit better.
> However, it's not something worth trying to get hold of, as it's not going to impress.
> Anandtech just threw up some pictures of the Chinese board.
> 
> ...



These are print screens from the videos above.

Anandtech would probably be the last one to send that board for testing. Because the ban in the forum. Just wait nicely in line. It is a matter of principle.


----------



## Tralalak (Feb 18, 2020)

*Centaur CHA x86 AI CPU pictured*
*source:* https://www.semiaccurate.com/2020/02/17/centaur-cha-x86-ai-cpu-pictured/


----------



## Tralalak (Feb 21, 2020)

*Stanford Seminar - Centaur Technology's Deep learning Coprocessor*


----------



## Tralalak (Feb 25, 2020)

*This mini PC is powered by a Zhaoxin x86 processor*
*source:* https://liliputing.com/2020/02/this-mini-pc-is-powered-by-a-zhaoxin-x86-processor.html


----------



## Tralalak (Feb 27, 2020)

*ZX-G with 16 cores and 64 PCIe 4.0 lanes @ 7nm
source: https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=12229503&postcount=471*


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 27, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Very likely. It's a little more fine-grained than just lumping the Atom in with one series or another, but at their core, Atom had a lot more in common with the Pentium3/PentiumM than with any of the 486 line.
> (BTW, thanks for pointing that out, I read up on more detail aspects of the Atom line and learned a few more things I didn't know before.)



Speculative execution is a huge core design fundemental decision, not sure I can agree with that but it's down to perspective I suppose.


----------



## RealNeil (Feb 27, 2020)

Octopuss said:


> The CPUs were crap


Yes, they were.


----------



## lexluthermiester (Feb 28, 2020)

R-T-B said:


> Speculative execution is a huge core design fundemental decision, not sure I can agree with that but it's down to perspective I suppose.


Speculative execution is also very power hungry, which is why Intel cut it from the feature set. Atom was intended to be very power efficient, so power intensive features were removed leaving only essential functionality. However, what remained was still directly derived from Pentium M. From there Atom evolved in directions that followed the idea's of power efficiency. As each iteration was produced the line became more effective. I personally think that Intel did well to make a power efficient CPU that also performed in a competent way...


RealNeil said:


> Yes, they were.


...despite what many may think. I still have two Atom powered devices, both still running strong and both still performing well.


----------



## R-T-B (Feb 28, 2020)

lexluthermiester said:


> Speculative execution is also very power hungry, which is why Intel cut it from the feature set.



I was talking about in terms of being similar, not in terms of whether or not it was a good design decision (it was).


----------



## Tralalak (Mar 26, 2020)

*Folding@home for Fighting Covid-19 with VIA QuadCore 2.0GHz (CPU) and NVIDIA GeForce GTX1050Ti (GPU)*


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 2, 2020)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1245756699400638466


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 4, 2020)

*A few retail boards beside the known board from Cjoyin: *



















*source:* https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=12268260&postcount=492


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 4, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *A few retail boards beside the known board from Cjoyin: *
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Those are interesting.


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 10, 2020)

*Zhaoxin KX-U6780A x86 CPU Tested: The Rise of China's Chips*
*source:* https://www.tomshardware.com/features/zhaoxin-kx-u6780a-x86-cpu-tested


______________________________


I underclocked to 2.7GHz my Eight Core processor AMD FX-8300 3.3GHz

*Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A 2.7GHz   vs   AMD FX-8300 3.3GHz @ 2.7GHz*


*Cinebench R20*

*Multi-threaded
Zhaoxin KX-U6780A 2.7GHz: 982 (+11,72%)
AMD FX-8300 @ 2.7GHz: 879 (89,51%)

Single-threaded
Zhaoxin KX-U6780A 2.7GHz: 127 (94,07%)
AMD FX-8300 @ 2.7GHz: 135 (+6,30%)*


*Geekbench 4*

*Multi-threaded
Zhaoxin KX-U6780A 2.7GHz: 9 128 (+8,99%)
AMD FX-8300 @ 2.7GHz: 8 375 (91,75%)

Single-threaded
Zhaoxin KX-U6780A 2.7GHz: 1 780 (94,53%)
AMD FX-8300 @ 2.7GHz: 1 883 (+5,79%)*


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 11, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> *Zhaoxin KX-U6780A x86 CPU Tested: The Rise of China's Chips*
> *source:* https://www.tomshardware.com/features/zhaoxin-kx-u6780a-x86-cpu-tested


Steve did testing on a similar Chinese CPU;


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 11, 2020)

Steve tested older Zhaoxin CPU very simular as my VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz (4C/4T) from 2015:

Steve: 28nm Zhaoxin Kaixian ZX-C+ C4701 2.08GHz (4C/4T)
Tomshardware: 16nm Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A 2.7GHz (8C/8T) SoC

______________________


Nice desktop with Zhaoxin Eight Core processor






*HP 268 Pro G1 MT*
ZhaoXin KaiXian KX-U6780A Processor
2.7 GHz
8 MB L2 cache, 8 cores
8 threads
ZhaoXin C960 UHD Graphics
70 W
Supports DDR4 memory up to 2666 MT/s

*source:* https://support.hp.com/in-en/product/hp-268-pro-g1-mt/32591011/document/c06537715#AbT2
*source:* http://h10032.www1.hp.com/ctg/Manual/c06558314


----------



## lexluthermiester (Apr 12, 2020)

Tralalak said:


> Steve tested older Zhaoxin CPU very simular as my VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz (4C/4T) from 2015:
> 
> Steve: 28nm Zhaoxin Kaixian ZX-C+ C4701 2.08GHz (4C/4T)
> Tomshardware: 16nm Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6780A 2.7GHz (8C/8T) SoC
> ...


That's different! Very interesting. Don't think it'll sell any better than the pet rock...


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 14, 2020)

*PConline: HP 268 Pro G1 review*
*source:* https://translate.google.com/transl...//desktops.pconline.com.cn/1335/13354004.html


----------



## AsRock (Apr 14, 2020)

mbeeston said:


> i miss cyrix.



I don't, it was a HOT! pile of SHIT, days after getting the 150+ i wished i had saved a little more for AMD's chip.

As for this thread i will believe it when they proove it and not before


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 14, 2020)

*HP 268 Pro G1  mainboard with Zhaoxin KX-U6780A processor*


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 20, 2020)

* Zhaoxin roadmap 2020/2021*

*CPU*
2.0G+ / 16C
8DDR4 / 128PCIE3
Dual Die / Dual Socket
16nm TSMC


*Stand alone GPU*
~ 70W
28nm TSMC

*source:* http://www.gdinsa.org/uploadfile/2020/0326/20200326055237805.pdf?fbclid=IwAR2EpeXCNs_kOca6hBFwRS1wpyuu_m_yIer02QC_rW4nJmU22enrP7KiW80


----------



## Tralalak (Apr 27, 2020)

*Interesting Japanese article about Centaur CHA x86 processor with AI coprocessor 
source: *https://translate.google.com/transl.../ascii.jp/elem/000/004/010/4010926/&sandbox=1
I found a Chinese review KX-U6780A. There is an interesting look at this product from their perspective.
*source: *https://translate.google.com/transl...u=https://news.mydrivers.com/1/685/685600.htm


----------



## Tralalak (May 3, 2020)




----------



## Tralalak (May 8, 2020)

China only... Loeschzwerg boards arrived to Germany (EU) 5.5.2020 






*source:* https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=12300213&postcount=520



I compared the results with Loeschzwerg at a distance with my AMD FX-8300 at 2.7GHz.


*Zhaoxin KX-U6780A 2.7GHz*






*CPU-Z 1.92 (Benchmark Version 17.01.64)*
Single-Thread: 181 (+14,70%)
Multi-Thread (8T): 1442 (+36,36%)
*source:* https://valid.x86.fr/pc5ryy


*Geekbench 4.4.2 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit) *
Single-Core Score: 1820 (96,86%)
Multi-Core Score: 9093 (+8,06%)
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/15466947?baseline=15466403


*Geekbench 5.1.1 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit) *
Single-Core Score: 362 (93,06%)
Multi-Core Score: 2387 (+8,50%)
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2070351?baseline=20673433


*vs*


*AMD FX-8300 3.3GHz @ 2.7GHz*







*CPU-Z 1.92 (Benchmark Version 17.01.64)*
Single-Thread: 158,1 (87,18%)
Multi-Thread (8T): 1057,2 (73,34%)


http://imgur.com/WOz5B9p



*Geekbench 4.4.2 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit) *
Single-Core Score: 1879 (+3,24%)
Multi-Core Score: 8415 (92,54%)
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/15466947?baseline=15466403


*Geekbench 5.1.1 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit) *
Single-Core Score: 389 (+7,46%)
Multi-Core Score: 2200 (92,17%)
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/2070351?baseline=2067343


----------



## Tralalak (May 15, 2020)

*Relative performance of Zhaoxin's processors in SPECint_2006*

Single Thread: ZX-A (1)  _vs_  ZX-C (1,4x) _vs_  KX-5000 (1,8x)  _vs_  KX-6000 (2,7x)  _vs _ KX-7000 (4,4x)

Multi Thread: ZX-A (1)  _vs_  ZX-C (2,3x) _vs_  KX-5000 (5,8x)  _vs_  KX-6000 (8,1x)  _vs _ KX-7000 (31x)

_*source:* https://read01.com/J8j2MyQ.html#.Xr7Eu8DgqUl_


A large increase in the performance of the new microarchitecture.
ZX-A / ZX-C / KX-5000 / KX-6000 = small cores
KX-7000 = BIG cores


----------



## Tralalak (May 29, 2020)

*Zhaoxin KX-U6780A in the test:
China's x86 processor can do that*
_*source:* https://www.golem.de/news/zhaoxin-kx-u6780a-im-test-das-kann-chinas-x86-prozessor-2005-148364.html_


----------



## Tralalak (May 30, 2020)

*Zhaoxin KiaXian KX-U6780A 2.7GHz in the Anandtech CPU Benchmarks Database
source:*  https://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU-2019/2224


----------



## Tralalak (Aug 18, 2020)




----------



## Tralalak (Aug 21, 2020)

*New Geekbench 5 results
CentaurHauls 2000 MHz (8 cores)  vs  ZHAOXIN KaiSheng KH-37800D 2700 MHz (16 cores) 
CentaurHauls Family 6 Model 71 Stepping 2  vs  2x CentaurHauls Family 7 Model 11 Stepping 14
8x New BIG Cores  vs  16x small Cores (2x 8 small Cores)

Multi-Core Score     3330 (+8,82%) vs 3060* *(91,89%)*
Single-Core Score     482 *(+33,15%)*     vs   362 *(75,10%)

source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/3358994?baseline=3361909

_The new KaiSheng KH-4000O series will have up to 32 of these new BIG cores while in dual socket up to 64 cores..._
"_Houston_, _we have a problem_"


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 6, 2021)

*First impression -* *Rise of the small cores 

Cinebench R23 CPU (Multi Core)
●  **VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz (28nm, 4C/4T, 2MB L2 cache)**:* 733 pts *(34,49%)*
●  *Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580 2.5GHz (16nm, **8C/8T, 8MB L2 cache), : *2 125 pts *(+189,90%)*


And here is my older game results with VIA QuadCore compare with Zhaoxin OctaCore

*World of Tanks enCORE - ULTRA
●  **VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz (28nm, 4C/4T, 2MB L2 cache) + NVIDIA GeForce GTX1050Ti 4GB OC**:* 5 648 *(50,10%)
●  Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580 2.5GHz (16nm, 8C/8T, 8MB L2 cache) + NVIDIA GeForce GTX1050Ti 4GB OC: *11 273* (+99,59%)

World of Tanks enCORE - MEDIUM
●  **VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz (28nm, 4C/4T, 2MB L2 cache) + NVIDIA GeForce GTX1050Ti 4GB OC*: 8 159 *(30,56%)*
●  *Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580 2.5GHz (16nm, 8C/8T, 8MB L2 cache) + NVIDIA GeForce GTX1050Ti 4GB OC*: 26 702 *(+227,27%)*


And the current game @ 2021

*Sniper Ghost Warrior Contracts 2  *

1080p HIGH Graphics Settings = perfectly playable and huge graphics


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jul 8, 2021)

__ https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1413180199106195457


----------



## TheLostSwede (Jul 18, 2021)

Qnap Launches NAS With Chinese x86 CPU: Zhaoxin-Based Model Available Worldwide
					

Chinese CPU makes it into a generally available NAS




					www.tomshardware.com


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 20, 2021)

*Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580 vs. Intel Pentium Silver N6000
In the footsteps of Alder Lake - The rise of SMALL cores*





*source: https://www.forum-3dcenter.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=607246*


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 25, 2021)




----------



## QuietBob (Jul 26, 2021)

Tralalak said:


> Zhaoxin KaiXian KX-U6580 _vs._ Intel Pentium Silver N6000


Very interesting findings, thanks for sharing them here!


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 27, 2021)




----------



## Tralalak (Jul 31, 2021)

*P.S. I'm not a PC player. I tried to play it.*


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 31, 2021)

EDIT:


----------



## Tralalak (Jan 4, 2022)

*New x86 processors from ZHAOXIN @ 2022*





*source:* https://www.zhaoxin.com/news_view.aspx?nid=2&typeid=267&id=1397


----------



## Flanker (Jan 13, 2022)

This isn't anything new, but I got to play with a U6780A at work. I don't how long I get to use it before my coworkers want it back. If anyone is interested in particular benchmarks let me know.


----------



## Tralalak (Feb 22, 2022)

*The new x86 VIA / Centaur CHA processor has been tested. Performance spoils the beats, the release is probably quite uncertain*
*source:* https://www.cnews.cz/novy-x86-proce...-vykon-kazi-takty-vydani-je-asi-dost-nejiste/


----------



## Fouquin (Feb 22, 2022)

CenTaur's lab in Texas was publicly liquidated betwen the 12th and 17th of February. The future of CHA and the CNS core architecture will likely appear only with Zhaoxin, and the remaining CHA processors and boards may appear in various places if whoever purchased the lots at auction has any intention of distributing them.

But if you'd like to see what they can do, one person at least got one and has been running it through the gauntlet.


----------



## Tralalak (Jun 22, 2022)

*The new Chinese CPU matches AMD with half the Cores and less consumption
source:* https://cuba.detailzero.com/technol...with-half-the-Cores-and-less-consumption.html

This is first open benchmark 16-cores ZHAOXIN Kaisheng KH-40000 Series x86 processor at 2.7GHz. The Kaisheng KH-40000 Series x86 processors (code name YONGFENG) can go up to 32 cores and 64 cores (on a dual-socket platform)!

*"Houston, we have a problem"*

P.S. Don't forget, YONGFENG is very "similar" Centaur CNS microarchitecture.


----------



## QuietBob (Jun 23, 2022)

*Zhaoxin KH-4000* 16c/16t, 32MB L3, 2.7GHz (?) all-core clock, 16nm node
*Epyc 7601*            32c/64t, 64MB L3, 2.7GHz all-core clock, 14nm node

Here's the complete set of results. The suite measures integer performance:





Benchmark descriptions
Very impressive showing for the Zhaoxin with only a quarter of threads, if the leak is reliable.


----------



## Fouquin (Jun 23, 2022)

Forgot this thread exists. I have a few performance results.




It's not bad, but it's let down by very poor clock scaling.


----------



## Tralalak (Jun 28, 2022)

New KH40000 results:

*2 Processors, 32 Cores
ZHAOXIN KaiSheng KH-40000/16
source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/15706425

CentaurHauls Family 6 Model 71 Stepping 2 *vs* CentaurHauls Family 7 Model 11 Stepping 3
CNS *vs* KH-40000
L1 Instruction Cache is 64KB per core and this is differend from Centaur CNS
L3 Cache is 8MB per eight core cluster and this is differend from Centaur CNS with 16MB L3 cache per eight core
*source:* https://browser.geekbench.com/v5/cpu/compare/12878360?baseline=15706425


----------



## Fouquin (Jun 28, 2022)

Tralalak said:


> New KH40000 results:
> 
> *2 Processors, 32 Cores
> ZHAOXIN KaiSheng KH-40000/16
> ...



Interesting to see where the changes affect performance. Granted my baseline result is at 2420MHz, but the KH40000 looks to be lagging behind significantly in single-core performance despite sharing the fundamentals of the core pipeline. They must be incurring some penalty from the split cache.


----------



## Tralalak (Jul 31, 2022)

Refreshed processor: higher frequencies and especially a new integrated graphics card

*ZHAOXIN KaiXian KX-6000G (4C 3.2GHz, 4MB L2)* with *ZX C1080 GPU (SM6.0, 512MB, PCI) (D3D 11)
source:* https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...af92a385edd0e5c3bb86b791f491ac9cbac9f4cc&l=en
*source:* https://ranker.sisoftware.co.uk/sho...9bab8de4d9ff97aa8cf4c9ef8aefd2e2c4b78ab2&l=en









						Chinese-Made Zhaoxin KX-6000G CPU With GT10C0 Integrated GPU Features The Same Performance As NVIDIA's GT 630
					

Chinese domestic chipmaker, Zhaoxin, is entering the realm of APUs with their first product, the KX-6000G CPU, offering a 1.5 TFLOPs GPU.




					wccftech.com
				




Interesting performance for an integrated graphics core as a successor to IP S3 Graphics/VIA.


----------



## Tralalak (Nov 1, 2022)

*Zhaoxin KX-6000G and KH-40000 have been officially released:
source:* https://www.zhaoxin.com/news_view.aspx?nid=2&typeid=268&id=1491






*KX-6000G Series:*​*source:* https://www.zhaoxin.com/prod_view.aspx?nid=3&typeid=581&id=2410

*KH-40000 Series*​*source:* https://www.zhaoxin.com/prod_view.aspx?nid=3&typeid=582&id=2411


----------

