4 September 2026
Turing Chip: 750 TOPS Isn't Top — But Software-Hardware Co-Design Is
Why judging XPeng's Turing chip by its 750 TOPS number misses the point — and why real-road results are the only benchmark that matters.
On chip compute and architecture, I don't recommend "cyber cricket-fighting" (spec-sheet duels).
The typical case is XPeng's Turing: 750 TOPS per chip doesn't look top-tier today. In fact, before last year's software-hardware unification, its assisted driving was quite underwhelming.
Then this year VLA 2.0 exploded, and the user experience shot up to domestic TOP 2. Can anyone still say the chip is bad?
The only real benchmark is real-car testing: on the road, did takeovers actually drop? Is comfort better? Is route-reading stronger?
A self-developed chip is architecturally better than NVIDIA's general-purpose architecture, but it also means the brand must build everything from scratch — even the compiler. So a chip's paper specs only set the ceiling of model performance; they don't guarantee the actual result.
Remember: software-hardware co-design is the way.
Figures
Source: 旌旗超智能 (Weibo) — translated & adapted for XPENGTech.
Get the next one direct.
New articles, or a daily / weekly digest — the same list EVConduit keeps.