EK Classic RGB P240 review
Promo: VIP-SCDKey Games and Windows 10 / Office
Synology DS620slim Gigabit NAS Review
Fractal Design Vector RS review
Corsair iCUE 465X review
be quiet! Pure Base 500 review
Borderlands 3: PC graphics performance benchmark review
Swiftech H240 X3 AIO review
Promo: URCDKey Autumn Sale Windows 10 Pro for $11
Corsair HS35 Stereo Gaming Headset Review
VIA Zhaoxin x86 4 and 8-core SoC processors launch
As we talked about a while ago, VIA launches their Zhaoxin processors, well SoC's really. Zhaoxin has launched the new processors in the KX-5000 series. With the to be released KX-7000, it wants to compete with AMD again.
KaiXian
KX is short for KaiXian, the 5000 series is to be used in laptops and desktops. The KaiXian chips are fabbed on a 28nm process from Chinese HLMC, using a WuDaoKou microarchitecture. The procs are quad-cores up to 2.0 GHz with 8 cores versions as well at the same maximum speed.
The KaiXian 5000 series is mostly aimed forPCs, workstations, and laptops. Those SKUs are positioned against Intel’s Core i3 and Core i5 processors.
| New SKUs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Cores/Threads | Frequency | L2 Cache |
| KX-5640 | 4/4 | 2.0 GHz | 4 MiB |
| KX-5540 | 4/4 | 1.8 GHz | 4 MiB |
| KX-U5680 | 8/8 | 2.0 GHz | 8 MiB |
| KX-U5580 | 8/8 | 1.8 GHz | 8 MiB |
| KX-U5580M | 8/8 | ≤ 1.8 GHz | 8 MiB |
The fastest 8-core proc thus has eight cores and eight threads at 2.0 GHz based on a 187 mm2 64-bit chip that has 2.1 billion transistors. 64 kb L1 cache is present per core and a total of 8 MB L2 cache. Instructions include Intel VT-x, Trusted Execution Technology, SSE4.2, AVX, and AVX2. The chips have PCIe 3.0, a total of 16 lanes and then four lanes likely for an additional interconnect to a chipset or heck, even something M2. The integrated memory controller supports dual channel ddr4-2133 up-to 64 GB. The integrated GPU provides a maximum of 4096 x 2304 pixels at 60 Hz via display port or HDMI. This is a DirectX 11.1 part, not DX12.
KaisHeng 20000
Zhaoxin also announced the KaisHeng 20000 series which is geared towards embedded networking, storage, and servers. This series should not be confused with a similarly named “ZX-2000” series which are actually quad-core ARM Cortex-A17 CPUs.
| New SKUs | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Model | Cores/Threads | Frequency | L2 Cache |
| KH-26800 | 8/8 | 2.0 GHz | 8 MiB |
| KH-25800 | 8/8 | 1.8 GHz | 8 MiB |
As with the KX-5000 parts, all models have virtualization support compatible with Intel’s VT-x, Trusted Execution Technology (TXT), SSE 4.2, and AVX support. The KaisHeng 20000 parts support up to 128 GiB of memory and have added support for ECC and RDIMMs. Additionally, those SKUs do not have a GPU enabled. Zhaoxin reported the following SPEC CPU 2006 scores:
| SPEC CPU 2006 Scores | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Test | KX-5640 (4C @ 2GHz) | KX-U5680 (8C @ 2GHz) | Atom C2750 (8C @ 2.4GHz/2.6GHz) |
| SPECint | 19.1 | 19.9 | 17.5 |
| SPECint_rate | 64.3 | 115 | 101 |
| SPECfp | 22.9 | 25.7 | 23.0 |
| SPECfp_rate | 53 | 81.3 | 76.8 |
Source: fuse.wikichip.org
rl66
Senior Member
Posts: 2103
Joined: 2007-05-31
Senior Member
Posts: 2103
Joined: 2007-05-31
#5513112 Posted on: 01/22/2018 09:25 PM
No more, latest Amiga OS can run more modern hardware... but it's no more an Amiga.
Yes and there is a big market about those kind of inexpensive and silent hardware (laptop and desktop) and few competitor, it's a nice move to try out if they can do better and earn money with it.
They don't need reverse engineering, they have left Intel with everything clear, and they have still their licence X86 / X86-64.
Off topic but Amiga OS (4 onwards) require a PowerPC based setup. They tried to sell there own desktops based on Power PC but they were hideously expensive for the spec and limited usability.
No more, latest Amiga OS can run more modern hardware... but it's no more an Amiga.
At 2.0ghz, they're not going to be competitive against anything AMD or Intel currently have. Maybe they want to compete with the Celeron J1800 and Athlon 5350?
Yes and there is a big market about those kind of inexpensive and silent hardware (laptop and desktop) and few competitor, it's a nice move to try out if they can do better and earn money with it.
Well hey, everyone started somewhere. I hope they will mature faster, as I'm 200% certain the have a fantastic reverse engineering team. 
They don't need reverse engineering, they have left Intel with everything clear, and they have still their licence X86 / X86-64.
McFly121
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: 2018-01-02
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: 2018-01-02
#5513141 Posted on: 01/22/2018 10:30 PM
SOCKET ??????
SOCKET ??????
kruno
Senior Member
Posts: 252
Joined: 2017-09-25
Senior Member
Posts: 252
Joined: 2017-09-25
#5513161 Posted on: 01/22/2018 11:16 PM
Of course VIA's socket and chipset, don't expect that it will work in either AMD or Intel mobo. That kind of compatibility hasn't been seen since OG Pentium
SOCKET ??????
Of course VIA's socket and chipset, don't expect that it will work in either AMD or Intel mobo. That kind of compatibility hasn't been seen since OG Pentium
Silva
Senior Member
Posts: 914
Joined: 2013-06-04
Senior Member
Posts: 914
Joined: 2013-06-04
#5513178 Posted on: 01/22/2018 11:57 PM
28nm @2.0Ghz.
Bro, they're dead at start.
28nm @2.0Ghz.
Bro, they're dead at start.
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5513252 Posted on: 01/23/2018 05:53 AM
They will be BGA processors. It was stated earlier in the thread. BGA means NO socket at all. They're essentially embedded processors.
SOCKET ??????
They will be BGA processors. It was stated earlier in the thread. BGA means NO socket at all. They're essentially embedded processors.
Andrew LB
Senior Member
Posts: 1046
Joined: 2012-05-22
Senior Member
Posts: 1046
Joined: 2012-05-22
#5513267 Posted on: 01/23/2018 07:39 AM
I have a feeling it would be prudent to not dismiss VIA's return so quickly for a few reasons. First of all, this is a test of the market more than anything, which is why i'd wager they went with a VERY mature (to be kind) and inexpensive manufacturing process. Much of the general public is computer illiterate, at least compared to anyone reading Guru3d.com, and if presented with the option to chose a netbook or all-in-one system (or mini) at a price point that is quite a bit lower than low end AMD offerings, they may end up turning a profit on this venture. If they do, i'd expect their next offering to be on a much more current manufacturing process and higher clock speeds.
Secondly, this is just an assumption, but I have a feeling that these products are going to be sold and marketed not to places where most of us live, but to the developing world where most people have never owned a computer or had to save for many years to buy one if they did. Much of the world doesn't live like we do in North America and Europe. Take a look at the median household income of countries around the world and you'll see what i'm talking about. Products like these are exactly what is needed to bring the such countries into the modern world.
Lastly, some people just want to browse the internet and lose IQ points by posting on facebook and twitter all day, and if they can save some money by going with an even cheaper PC, these will sell just fine. Most people out there buy technology based on how much cash they have in their wallet after buying a burger and fries and could care less if the CPU is made by Intel, AMD, or VIA.
I have a feeling it would be prudent to not dismiss VIA's return so quickly for a few reasons. First of all, this is a test of the market more than anything, which is why i'd wager they went with a VERY mature (to be kind) and inexpensive manufacturing process. Much of the general public is computer illiterate, at least compared to anyone reading Guru3d.com, and if presented with the option to chose a netbook or all-in-one system (or mini) at a price point that is quite a bit lower than low end AMD offerings, they may end up turning a profit on this venture. If they do, i'd expect their next offering to be on a much more current manufacturing process and higher clock speeds.
Secondly, this is just an assumption, but I have a feeling that these products are going to be sold and marketed not to places where most of us live, but to the developing world where most people have never owned a computer or had to save for many years to buy one if they did. Much of the world doesn't live like we do in North America and Europe. Take a look at the median household income of countries around the world and you'll see what i'm talking about. Products like these are exactly what is needed to bring the such countries into the modern world.
Lastly, some people just want to browse the internet and lose IQ points by posting on facebook and twitter all day, and if they can save some money by going with an even cheaper PC, these will sell just fine. Most people out there buy technology based on how much cash they have in their wallet after buying a burger and fries and could care less if the CPU is made by Intel, AMD, or VIA.
artk2219
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 2017-08-17
Junior Member
Posts: 10
Joined: 2017-08-17
#5513493 Posted on: 01/23/2018 06:58 PM
Socket 370 for the P3 was the last time that this happened. Due to an agreement with Intel, they were able to release their first gen CPU's on socket 370, i think that agreement expired in like 2007, so since then they have been releasing their own platforms.
Of course VIA's socket and chipset, don't expect that it will work in either AMD or Intel mobo. That kind of compatibility hasn't been seen since OG Pentium
Socket 370 for the P3 was the last time that this happened. Due to an agreement with Intel, they were able to release their first gen CPU's on socket 370, i think that agreement expired in like 2007, so since then they have been releasing their own platforms.
Fox2232
Senior Member
Posts: 9689
Joined: 2012-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 9689
Joined: 2012-07-20
#5513505 Posted on: 01/23/2018 07:35 PM
I have a feeling it would be prudent to not dismiss VIA's return so quickly for a few reasons. First of all, this is a test of the market more than anything, which is why i'd wager they went with a VERY mature (to be kind) and inexpensive manufacturing process. Much of the general public is computer illiterate, at least compared to anyone reading Guru3d.com, and if presented with the option to chose a netbook or all-in-one system (or mini) at a price point that is quite a bit lower than low end AMD offerings, they may end up turning a profit on this venture. If they do, i'd expect their next offering to be on a much more current manufacturing process and higher clock speeds.
Secondly, this is just an assumption, but I have a feeling that these products are going to be sold and marketed not to places where most of us live, but to the developing world where most people have never owned a computer or had to save for many years to buy one if they did. Much of the world doesn't live like we do in North America and Europe. Take a look at the median household income of countries around the world and you'll see what i'm talking about. Products like these are exactly what is needed to bring the such countries into the modern world.
Lastly, some people just want to browse the internet and lose IQ points by posting on facebook and twitter all day, and if they can save some money by going with an even cheaper PC, these will sell just fine. Most people out there buy technology based on how much cash they have in their wallet after buying a burger and fries and could care less if the CPU is made by Intel, AMD, or VIA.
If used in mobile system, those real 8C chips will crush Any Fake cored Atoms.
And 4C/4T will deliver around 65% of intel's mobile 2C/4T chips. 8C/8T will be comparable to ~65% of intel's mobile 4C/8T chips.
That's far from bad if OS reacts smoothly without delays and price is right. Issue of 2C/4T chips lies in it's inability to deal with one hogging thread (Firefox animation cause it at any time).
So, more separate cores are more resilient to this. I am sure that 8C/8T mobile chip at 2GHz can prove to be incomparably better than 2C/4T in great many practical scenarios matching average PC user.
As simple thing as having 10+ browser tabs open, YT playing, excel open and working on it. It is already something where 2C/4T runs out of breath.
I have a feeling it would be prudent to not dismiss VIA's return so quickly for a few reasons. First of all, this is a test of the market more than anything, which is why i'd wager they went with a VERY mature (to be kind) and inexpensive manufacturing process. Much of the general public is computer illiterate, at least compared to anyone reading Guru3d.com, and if presented with the option to chose a netbook or all-in-one system (or mini) at a price point that is quite a bit lower than low end AMD offerings, they may end up turning a profit on this venture. If they do, i'd expect their next offering to be on a much more current manufacturing process and higher clock speeds.
Secondly, this is just an assumption, but I have a feeling that these products are going to be sold and marketed not to places where most of us live, but to the developing world where most people have never owned a computer or had to save for many years to buy one if they did. Much of the world doesn't live like we do in North America and Europe. Take a look at the median household income of countries around the world and you'll see what i'm talking about. Products like these are exactly what is needed to bring the such countries into the modern world.
Lastly, some people just want to browse the internet and lose IQ points by posting on facebook and twitter all day, and if they can save some money by going with an even cheaper PC, these will sell just fine. Most people out there buy technology based on how much cash they have in their wallet after buying a burger and fries and could care less if the CPU is made by Intel, AMD, or VIA.
If used in mobile system, those real 8C chips will crush Any Fake cored Atoms.
And 4C/4T will deliver around 65% of intel's mobile 2C/4T chips. 8C/8T will be comparable to ~65% of intel's mobile 4C/8T chips.
That's far from bad if OS reacts smoothly without delays and price is right. Issue of 2C/4T chips lies in it's inability to deal with one hogging thread (Firefox animation cause it at any time).
So, more separate cores are more resilient to this. I am sure that 8C/8T mobile chip at 2GHz can prove to be incomparably better than 2C/4T in great many practical scenarios matching average PC user.
As simple thing as having 10+ browser tabs open, YT playing, excel open and working on it. It is already something where 2C/4T runs out of breath.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7581
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5513536 Posted on: 01/23/2018 09:12 PM
At 2.0ghz, they're not going to be competitive against anything AMD or Intel currently have. Maybe they want to compete with the Celeron J1800 and Athlon 5350?
Depending on the price (aka what the laptop or etc. whole price is) and depending on how the 2Ghz would actually perform, i would potentially go with an 8-core VIA over a 4-core Intel i3 or higher and AMD 4-core Ryzen. Most programs don't need a lot of single-core performance to work just fine, however having more cores definitely helps the PC feel more responsive.
It wouldn't be something i'd buy for the purpose of using "intense" programs of any kind, but a laptop for laptops sake, would probably be quite nice.
At 2.0ghz, they're not going to be competitive against anything AMD or Intel currently have. Maybe they want to compete with the Celeron J1800 and Athlon 5350?
Depending on the price (aka what the laptop or etc. whole price is) and depending on how the 2Ghz would actually perform, i would potentially go with an 8-core VIA over a 4-core Intel i3 or higher and AMD 4-core Ryzen. Most programs don't need a lot of single-core performance to work just fine, however having more cores definitely helps the PC feel more responsive.
It wouldn't be something i'd buy for the purpose of using "intense" programs of any kind, but a laptop for laptops sake, would probably be quite nice.
RealNC
Senior Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: 2011-11-24
Senior Member
Posts: 2994
Joined: 2011-11-24
#5513573 Posted on: 01/23/2018 11:53 PM
To build x86 CPUs, you need a license from Intel. I wonder how much that cost them.
To build x86 CPUs, you need a license from Intel. I wonder how much that cost them.
Venix
Senior Member
Posts: 903
Joined: 2016-08-01
Senior Member
Posts: 903
Joined: 2016-08-01
#5513616 Posted on: 01/24/2018 03:19 AM
If i remember well they still have x86 licence but they can not sell it /transfer it , if i am wrong correct me though
To build x86 CPUs, you need a license from Intel. I wonder how much that cost them.
If i remember well they still have x86 licence but they can not sell it /transfer it , if i am wrong correct me though
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 20992
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5513621 Posted on: 01/24/2018 03:52 AM
VIA obtained their x86 license to design/develop x86 CPUs when they purchased Cyrix. Cyrix was a fab-less CPU company and their license was transferred to VIA. To produce an 86x64 (AMD64) compatible CPU, they need a license from AMD the same as Intel did. (both "EM64T" and "Intel 64" are actually "AMD64" and are covered by a cross-license agreement between AMD and Intel) So, to actually compete with AMD and Intel properly, VIA needs an x86 license from Intel and an 86x64 license from AMD, as does the company actually fabricating the chips.
To build x86 CPUs, you need a license from Intel. I wonder how much that cost them.
VIA obtained their x86 license to design/develop x86 CPUs when they purchased Cyrix. Cyrix was a fab-less CPU company and their license was transferred to VIA. To produce an 86x64 (AMD64) compatible CPU, they need a license from AMD the same as Intel did. (both "EM64T" and "Intel 64" are actually "AMD64" and are covered by a cross-license agreement between AMD and Intel) So, to actually compete with AMD and Intel properly, VIA needs an x86 license from Intel and an 86x64 license from AMD, as does the company actually fabricating the chips.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 9689
Joined: 2012-07-20
At 2.0ghz, they're not going to be competitive against anything AMD or Intel currently have. Maybe they want to compete with the Celeron J1800 and Athlon 5350?
VIA has done well with low-power processors. They've never produced a mid-range or high-end processor that was able to compete directly with their AMD or Intel counterparts though.
Atoms. IIRC it should be expected to have around 55~60% of intel-Core IPC, that's just bit better than Atoms which are around 50%.
With 2GHz it is quite comparable. Except here, you have 4 or 8 cores. While new Atoms are fake HT chips. One thread causes 50% load on 4 core CPU, 2 Threads extract all CPU performance, and adding 3rd is for nothing.
I expect them to be efficient in similar way as Atoms. 2 fully loaded threads in Atom x5-z8500 ate 9.6W.
Considering better IPC, if 8C chip runs at 40W, it is better than Atom.
If they were able to clock it to 4GHz, it would be only as good as 8C Bulldozer against old i5 w/ 4C. Except today 6C and 8C chips are common. So, it would need to have 12C or 16C.
Since that's not the case, it can compete only with Atoms.