It is well known that since Xiaomi recently launched its self-developed 3nm chip, the Xuanjie O1, it has faced significant criticism online. Some claim it is a rebranded Qualcomm chip, while others say it is an ARM CSS customized chip.
Additionally, some have analyzed Xiaomi’s R&D investment and the costs associated with chip development, asserting that it cannot be self-developed, leaving many confused and impressed.
These individuals seem to enjoy denying Xiaomi’s achievements, wanting everyone to believe that Xiaomi lacks the capability to develop chips independently.
It is quite strange that Xiaomi has developed a 3nm chip, which should be a great achievement for Chinese technology. Why has it attracted so much negative press? I really cannot understand it, especially since some industry leaders have been refuting these claims, yet some people remain skeptical.
Recently, in response to the question of whether Xiaomi’s chip is an ARM CSS customization, an ARM executive provided clarification.
Chris Bergey, ARM’s Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Client Line of Business, stated that ARM’s CSS is a customized product offered by ARM. According to his explanation, this ARM CSS provides customers with a more complete CPU/GPU cluster solution and software stack. In simple terms, ARM has integrated more into the CPU and GPU, but it is not a complete chip.
He mentioned that if customers purchase ARM CSS, they do not need to invest too much effort into the CPU and GPU; they can focus on adding interfaces, ISP, DSP, NPU, baseband, etc., according to their needs. They can also add other cores based on their requirements, which can improve efficiency, reduce costs, and accelerate the product development cycle, as the CPU and GPU are relatively complete.
He also stated that leading smartphone manufacturers like Xiaomi developing their own chips is an inevitable trend, as companies like Huawei, Apple, and Samsung have been doing so to varying degrees for many years. Therefore, Xiaomi will certainly develop its own chips, especially since Xiaomi not only produces smartphones but also cars, necessitating differentiation.
Thus, ARM’s statements imply two things: first, that Xiaomi’s chip is self-developed and not an ARM customization; second, that the ARM CSS solution is not a plug-and-play option, as it only reduces the R&D burden for the CPU and GPU, while other components still require development.
Therefore, the doubts about Xiaomi’s chip can cease; why shouldn’t Xiaomi be able to develop its own chips? Who has been hurt by the development of this chip? Is there really a need for such negativity?