Machinepower Index / Dossiers / China
China
Total Sovereignty — Own every layer — energy, fabs, frontier models, talent and the rules they run under. Only two nations can afford the attempt, and neither reaches true autarky.
Score comes from the twelve measurements beneath the three layers. A nation needs all of them at once — world-class models are no use on a grid that cannot power them — so one weak measurement pulls the Score down instead of being averaged away. Potential is the plain average of the three layers. The gap between the two is what being lopsided costs: nothing if a nation is evenly built, more the further its strengths and weaknesses sit apart. The exact formula is on the methodology page.
The three layers
Energy, grids, data centres and silicon — the physical capacity to run models at scale.
Models, alignment capability, standards influence and the talent that produces them.
The capacity to wire AI into the state and the economy while holding public consent.
Where the score comes from
Each layer is the plain average of its four measurements. The Score uses those twelve measurements directly rather than the three averages, because averaging hides things: a 10 next to a 3 comes out as a forgettable 6.5, and you lose both facts. Every measurement is scored 0–10 and marked to show where the number came from.
| Layer | Sub-dimension | Basis | Score |
|---|---|---|---|
| Watts | Planning & Permitting | Assessed | 9.8 |
| Firm Power Capacity | Dataset | 9.9 | |
| Sovereign Compute | Dataset | 8.7 | |
| Hardware & Silicon Access | Dataset | 6.2 | |
| Weights | Frontier Model Output | Dataset | 9.1 |
| Alignment Capability | Assessed | 9.0 | |
| Regulatory Standing | Dataset | 9.1 | |
| Talent Density | Assessed | 8.6 | |
| Will | State Procurement | Dataset | 7.6 |
| Public Sector Adoption | Dataset | 4.9 | |
| Workforce Transition | Assessed | 8.6 | |
| Public Trust | Dataset | 9.7 |
Dataset means the number comes straight from a published source. Assessed means we judged it ourselves, because no dataset measures that thing cleanly — 4 of the 12 here, and 116 of 312 across the Index. The CSV export flags them too.
Sources
Every source below was published within the last 12 months. These are the main ones behind China's profile. The full list, and the rule on how recent a source has to be, are on the methodology page.
LineShine (National Supercomputing Centre Shenzhen), a CPU-only indigenous system, debuted at #1 on the June 2026 TOP500 at 2.198 exaflops, ending El Capitan's reign.
View source →WIPO Technology SPARK (July 2026) records China publishing over 43,000 of the 56,000+ generative AI patent families filed in 2024-25, with the field growing at a 64% compound annual rate.
View source →Epoch's database shows Chinese open-weight models (DeepSeek, Alibaba Qwen) trailing the US frontier by ~7 months on average, with the top-model performance gap narrowed to 2.7% per the 2026 AI Index.
View source →Chokepoints — what the world cannot get anywhere else
China controls two of the six steps in building an AI chip, and nobody else can work around them. A step is listed only where the firms that dominate it are based in China and the government could actually shut it off. See the whole chain.
China processes the large majority of separated rare earths, the inputs for the magnets in manufacturing equipment, robotics, drones and defence hardware. Beijing has already restricted their export, which converted a commercial position into an instrument of state.
US Geological Survey →Both are needed for advanced semiconductors and optoelectronics, and both went under Chinese export licensing in 2023. A second chokepoint, and one Beijing has already shown it is willing to close.
US Geological Survey →Listed, not scored. None of this lifts the Index Score. The Index measures what a nation can do on its own. This is a different kind of power — what everyone else cannot do without it. Eighteen of the twenty-five nations control nothing like this.
Bottlenecks
These hold China below its Potential. Its two lowest scores cost it the most: public sector adoption at 4.9 (part of Will) and hardware & silicon access at 6.2 (part of Watts).
Assessment
China leads in material power and state-led diffusion. Its ability to build infrastructure at scale is unmatched. The primary risk is intelligence power, specifically access to high-end compute and international standard-setting influence.
The art of the possible
China's path runs through silicon: each indigenous lithography and accelerator breakthrough converts its unmatched build-speed and state diffusion into genuine full-stack sovereignty. If domestic chips close on the frontier, its bottleneck largely dissolves.
Strategic play — Total Sovereignty
Own every layer — energy, fabs, frontier models, talent and the rules they run under. Only two nations can afford the attempt, and neither reaches true autarky.
The play is editorial, not scored: it names the game China's measured position supports. Eight plays run across the Index — Total Sovereignty, Strategic Autonomy, Chokepoint Leverage, Diffusion Advantage, Compute Rentier, Specialist Power, Sovereign Capital and Siege Autarky.
Open China in the live Index → — every source behind every number, the comparison tool and the CSV export.