Zhaoxin's ZX-F/KX-7000/KH-40000

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
You obviously just don't understand. Single core performance doesn't matter. What makes these CPUs special is that you can buy 8 small cores that somehow use as much or more power than the competitors' 4 cores processors and still get blown out by performance in both single and multi-threaded benchmarks. All this while having an astonishing low perf/$ when trying to actually buy a system that contains said small cores. Why wouldn't you be super excited about this? /s
Well at least it beats 4c/4t Atom convincingly in MT! Yay?
 

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
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/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/2067343



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%)



Geekbench 4.4.2 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit)
Single-Core Score: 1879 (+3,24%)
Multi-Core Score: 8415 (92,54%)
source:


Geekbench 5.1.1 Tryout for Windows x86 (64-bit)
Single-Core Score: 389 (+7,46%)
Multi-Core Score: 2200 (92,17%)
source:
 
  • Like
Reactions: lightmanek

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
Those numbers are pretty terrible. I'm sorry, it's just true. VIA/Xiaozhin can't get per-core performance high enough so they're compensating by cramming in extras, and the power consumption shows. There are 8c Denvertons out there (Goldmont+) with better performance than that thing. Notably:


It doesn't boost as high as a J5005, but a hypothetical consumer Goldmont+ based on the C3750 would likely turn in the following scores:

CPUz:
ST: 184
MT: 1493

GB4:
ST: 1944
MT: 11570

GB5:
ST: 400
MT: 2574

Note that the C3750 only has a 2.4 GHz boost clock (as opposed to the 2.7 GHz of the J5005). Intel easily could have raised that for a consumer product while staying within the 21W TDP of the reference Denverton. Fact is that Intel never bothered selling an 8c Goldmont+ to the consumer market because they saw no point. Nobody would want that for an office PC when they could have gotten one of Intel's Core-series chips instead. The same holds true today. I would definitely not want one of these VIA CPUs in my office PC.
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Senior member
Nov 14, 2014
956
125
106
It's too early to be getting concerned about Zhaoxin when the star (KX-7000) of the show has yet to arrive and their earlier releases were still mostly based on the architecture of VIA's last in-house design ...

Only after the release of their next design could we make a fair assessment about the abilities of their design team ...
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
It's too early to be getting concerned about Zhaoxin when the star (KX-7000) of the show has yet to arrive and their earlier releases were still mostly based on the architecture of VIA's last in-house design ...
Tell that to VIA/Zhaoxin? Still waiting.
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Senior member
Nov 14, 2014
956
125
106
Tell that to VIA/Zhaoxin? Still waiting.
I don't have to tell anyone anything ...

We'll eventually know the truth when it arrives but I reiterate it's still too soon to judge their true prowess based off of their older releases which wasn't even mainly designed by them ...
 

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
Sure is taking awhile, isn't it? Who do they think they are? Intel?
2020 - KX-6000 Series for office computers
2021 - KH-40000 Series up to 32 cores on two socket solution up to 64 cores for server computers
2022 - KX-7000 Series up to 16 cores for gaming computers

They are Centaur Technlogy / VIA and join venture ZHAOXIN.
 

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
Good for you!
If I wanted to be part of the globalism, I would choose AMD or Intel.
If I want to be different, I choose Zhaoxin (Centaur / VIA).
Why can't I decide?
Not everyone also buys the same car brands.

For my needs, is the eight small cores of KX-U6780A 2.7GHz a powerful processor for office pc, multimedia and as casual gaming as well.
Just like my AMD FX-8300 Eignt core processor at 2.7GHz.
 

ThatBuzzkiller

Senior member
Nov 14, 2014
956
125
106
Sure is taking awhile, isn't it? Who do they think they are? Intel?
Is it absolutely necessary for you to badger others here ?

The management and it's employees don't think that they're comparable to Intel and they don't act like they are either since just about every last of one of it's workers over there have regular hours that would be considered well past overtime at Intel ...
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
Is it absolutely necessary for you to badger others here ?
Yes? If anyone's going to talk about VIA/Zhaoxin products, let's make people be honest about it. Why is he dredging up old FX-8300 results? Instead:


or here's a good one:


The management and it's employees don't think that they're comparable to Intel and they don't act like they are either since just about every last of one of it's workers over there have regular hours that would be considered well past overtime at Intel ...
I have no idea how hard they work their engineers. I can only evaluate them based on their products and their release schedule.

Their release schedule seems like they're slowing down. I thought they were supposed to be off the old VIA cores by now? We've been hearing about the KX-7000 for a long time.
 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,321
8,020
136
I don't see why somebody keeps posting horrible results on these processors. If its bad, leave it alone... They are getting murdered on single core and multi-core by cell phone CPU's ??
 

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
I will never understand people who despise the hard work of others.

Anyway. Let's go over to something useful:

 

Markfw

CPU Moderator, VC&G Moderator, Elite Member
Super Moderator
May 16, 2002
20,321
8,020
136
I will never understand people who despise the hard work of others.

Anyway. Let's go over to something useful:

If you are referring to me, everybody works hard. We talk here about those products that are competitors, the ones that aren't rarely get mentioned, but you keep bringing them up. You need to post when there is something to be proud of, other than hard work, which we all do. I don't despise anything, and never said that.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
Nobody hates VIA/Zhaoxin. The results are disappointing though, and trying to fluff them up by comparing a 70W chip released in 2020 to an FX-8300 is not really helping matters much.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Markfw

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
I have at home in my collection only AMD FX-8300, AMD Sempron 145 processor and VIA QuadCore C4650 2.0GHz on board processor on VIA EPIA M920-20Q mainboard.
So what do you want from me?
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
So what do you want from me?
Geekbench browser is your friend. If that's what you're going to use. For x86 CPUs, CPUz benchmark results are also freely available on the web (which was the other bench you listed).
 

Kosusko

Member
Nov 10, 2019
72
39
51
But I tested it on my AMD FX8300 processor. I wanted to see processors on the same frequency: 2.7GHz (IPC).
There was nothing stopping you from using the geekbench database. You did it anyway. Nobody stopped you.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
16,020
4,970
136
But I tested it on my AMD FX8300 processor. I wanted to see processors on the same frequency: 2.7GHz (IPC).
There was nothing stopping you from using the geekbench database. You did it anyway. Nobody stopped you.
Either you don't understand what I was saying initially, or you're deliberately trying to avoid the point. So I'll let it drop.
 

AmericanLocomotive

Junior Member
Apr 30, 2020
16
23
41
But I tested it on my AMD FX8300 processor. I wanted to see processors on the same frequency: 2.7GHz (IPC).
There was nothing stopping you from using the geekbench database. You did it anyway. Nobody stopped you.
You're desperately trying to defend this processor's performance, comparing to your FX-8300 under-clocked to 2.7 GHz saying how great it would be for casual office use and light gaming.

The FX series was one of AMD's biggest blunders, and early chips like Bulldozer and Piledriver had worse IPC than the Phenom II predecessor released in 2009. So this 2020 CPU has IPC roughly equivalent to that of CPU designs released 11 years ago, is running at clock speeds from 11 years ago and is consuming power like CPUs from ~8 years ago.

I had an FX processor and it wasn't great at games at 4.1 GHz - at 2.7 GHz it'd be downright miserable. The only thing the Zhaoxin has going for it is lots of cores. It's just like every other CPU VIA/Centaur has designed - it's ~6-8 years behind the competition. Which is okay given their target market and historical cost. But don't try and pretend it's anywhere close to competitive.
 
Last edited:

ASK THE COMMUNITY