首頁Lexus NX
搜尋歷史
熱門搜尋
經銷商登入 / 註冊
In Malaysia's SUV market, many buyers compare the Proton X70 and Honda HR-V when choosing a car. These two models are quite close in price and positioning. Today, we will make a detailed comparison from multiple aspects to help you save time on research.
The Proton X70 OTR price in Malaysia is RM 106,800 - 122,300. There are 3 versions in total, including 1.5L Standard 2WD (RM 106,800), 1.5L Executive 2WD (RM 115,800), 1.5L Premium 2WD (RM 122,300), etc.
The Honda HR-V OTR price in Malaysia is RM 115,900 - 143,900. There are 4 versions in total, including 2026 e:HEV 1.5L RS (RM 143,900), 2026 1.5T V (RM 137,900), 2026 1.5T E (RM 130,900), etc.
From a price perspective, the Proton X70's starting price is indeed RM 9,100 cheaper than the Honda HR-V. If your budget is limited, Proton's entry-level version can already meet daily needs. However, note that the few thousand ringgit cheaper might involve trade-offs in features, depending on your specific needs.
The Proton X70 is equipped with a 1.5L Turbo, producing 140 hp. Official fuel consumption is 7.0 L/100km.
The Honda HR-V is equipped with a 1.5L Turbo, producing 140 hp. Official fuel consumption is 7.0 L/100km.
Both cars use the same powertrain, so the driving experience is basically no different. Fuel consumption is also similar, so there is no need to worry too much about this point.
The Proton X70 safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP). Active safety systems include ADAS (ACC, AEB, LKA, LDA, BSM, RCTA).
The Honda HR-V safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP). Active safety systems include Honda SENSING (ACC, CMBS, LKAS, RDM).
Both cars have the same safety rating. In this class, safety features are quite comprehensive. New car safety is generally good these days, so no need to worry too much about this.
Proton X70 body length is 4400 mm, trunk 400 L.
Honda HR-V body length is 4500 mm, trunk 450 L.
In terms of space, the Honda HR-V's body is 100 mm longer than the Proton X70, offering a better advantage in passenger space. However, the Proton X70 is a bit more flexible for parking in the city. Each has its trade-offs.
Proton X70 and Honda HR-V are both mainstream choices in the Malaysia market, suitable for family use and daily commuting. If you value brand reputation and resale value more, you can prioritize the one with better reputation; if you care more about value for money and features, choose the one with richer configurations. Ultimately, it is recommended to test drive both, as personal experience is the most important.
In general, both Proton X70 and Honda HR-V are very good models in the Malaysia market. Which one to choose depends mainly on your personal needs and budget. We suggest doing your research, comparing quotes from several dealerships, and then test driving to make the final decision. Buying a car is a big matter, spending time on research will never be wrong.
日前，深藍汽車正式公布了全新升級的深藍 S05。作為一款已經在全球累計收穫超過 24 萬用戶、連續多月蟬聯細分市場銷量冠軍的明星車型，S05 的今次煥新登場，顯然不僅僅是一次例行的產品迭代。
在競爭已進入白熱化的 2026 年中國新能源市場，一款「爆款」車型如何保持生命力？深藍 S05 的升級邏輯，或許給出了一個值得深思的答案。而這款車的意義，也早已超出了產品本身——它既是深藍汽車從「爆款」走向「常青樹」的關鍵落子，也是長安汽車在新能源戰略整合窗口期的一塊重要壓艙石。
從夠用到吸睛
回顧現款深藍 S05，其成功的关键在於精準卡位——在 11.99 萬至 14.99 萬元的價格區間，以純電 + 增程的雙動力佈局、2880mm 的超長軸距以及後置後驅的駕駛樂趣，精準切入了年輕家庭用戶的痛點。上市以來月均銷量穩定破萬，足以證明其產品定義的成功。
而全新深藍 S05 的升級，核心思路可以概括為一句話：在既有優勢之上，把「智能」這塊短板補齊，把「設計」這張長板拉長。
智能駕駛是此次升級最引人注目的變化。新車首次搭載了激光雷達，配合升級後的駕駛輔助「小藍燈」，在感知硬體層面實現了質的飛躍。在 10-15 萬元級的緊湊型 SUV 市場中，激光雷達的搭載目前仍屬稀缺配置。深藍 S05 此舉，實質上是将高階智能驾驶的硬件門檻大幅拉低，让更多主流用户能够享受到更精准的风险预判和更安心的驾驶辅助体验。這不僅是產品力的提升，更是对「科技平權」理念的一次實質性落地。
設計層面，全新 S05 延續了品牌「共生美學」的核心理念，並深化演繹了「星際飛翼」設計語言。封閉式前格柵搭配狹長燈組與「深藍之眼」花瓣燈，辨識度進一步提升。無框車門、半隱藏式門把手、1.9㎡全景天幕等年輕化配置的保留與優化，則繼續強化了其「潮電 SUV」的產品標籤。
內飾方面，全新「懸浮星艦」設計語言帶來了更具科技感的座艙氛圍。256 色懸浮式環抱氛圍燈支持隨情景模式律動，大尺寸懸浮中控屏與 HUD 抬頭顯示的搭配，進一步強化了人車交互的沉浸感。而 2880mm 軸距所帶來的寬敞後排空間、492L 雙層後備廂與 159L 前備箱的儲物組合，則讓這台緊湊型 SUV 在實用層面依然保持着越級的競爭力。
動力層面，新車繼續提供純電與增程雙動力選擇。純電版搭載 272 馬力後置單電機，提供 520km 與 620km 兩種 CLTC 續航版本；增程版 CLTC 純電續航 215km，綜合續航達 1310km。值得注意的是，新車搭載的寧德時代金鐘罩電池組與 3C 超級快充技術，在補能效率和電池安全層面均為同級領先水平。
從「爆款」到「常青樹」，S05 對深藍舉足輕重
全新深藍 S05 的登場，恰逢深藍品牌發展的關鍵節點。
從銷量數據來看，深藍汽車 2026 年上半年全球累計銷量已達 164,156 輛，同比增長 14.6%，其中 6 月單月銷量 33,625 輛，連續 4 個月突破 3 萬輛大關。海外市場表現尤為亮眼，上半年海外累計銷售 35,795 輛，同比增長 141%。而深藍 S05 一款車型，6 月全球銷量就達到 18,369 輛，佔品牌總銷量的半數以上，是深藍当之无愧的「銷量擔當」。
對於任何一個汽車品牌而言，單一車型的過度依賴既是榮耀也是風險。深藍汽車顯然意識到了這一點——L06、S07 等車型正在快速成長，但 S05 作為品牌「基本盤」的地位短期內難以被撼動。全新 S05 的推出，正是為了鞏固這一基本盤：通過激光雷達的上車和設計的迭代，讓這款已經證明自己的車型在智能駕駛浪潮中不掉隊，繼續保持對競品的領先優勢。
從品牌定位來看，深藍一直強調「年輕、科技、運動」的品牌調性。全新 S05 在外觀、內飾、智能三個維度的同步升級，恰好與這一調性形成了深度呼應。它不僅是深藍產品陣列中最走量的車型，更是品牌理念最直接的載體——讓年輕用戶以觸手可及的價格，享受到前沿的智能電動體驗。
從單打獨鬥到戰略協同
把視角拉高到長安汽車的層面，全新深藍 S05 的意義更加深遠。
2026 年，長安汽車正在推進一項重要的戰略調整——對阿維塔與深藍汽車進行戰略性整合與協同發展。整合後的兩大品牌將形成 150 萬 + 級的中高端品牌群，其中深藍的目標是 2030 年年銷 100 萬輛。在這一宏大目標面前，深藍需要一款足夠能打、足夠持久的核心車型來支撐銷量基盤——而 S05 正是這個角色最合适的人選。
與此同時，中國新能源市場的競爭格局正在發生深刻變化。2026 年上半年，純電市場已進入存量競爭階段，增程賽道也面臨結構性調整的壓力。在這樣的大環境下，一款月銷穩定過萬、且能通過持續迭代保持產品競爭力的車型，其戰略價值怎麼強調都不為過。全新 S05 的推出，不僅為深藍的銷量增長提供了持續動能，也為長安新能源矩陣的穩定運行提供了重要支撐。
更值得關注的是 S05 在全球化佈局中的角色。目前深藍 S05 已熱銷全球 73 個國家和地區，並斬獲了德國 iF 設計大獎等國際榮譽。深藍汽車已進入全球 110 多個國家和地區，在泰國建立了右舵車工廠。全新 S05 的升級，無疑將進一步提升這款「全球車」在國際市場的競爭力，為長安汽車的「海納百川」全球化戰略添上重要的一塊拼圖。
汽車網評：全新深藍 S05 的登場，表面上看是一次產品的中期改款，實則是深藍汽車從「爆款驅動」走向「體系化競爭」的關鍵一步。激光雷達的下放、設計的進化、空間的越級——這些產品力的升級背後，是一套完整的產品定義邏輯：在主流價格區間內，把用戶最在意的智能化、設計感和實用性做到極致。
對於深藍汽車而言，S05 是穩住基本盤的定海神針；對於長安汽車而言，S05 是新能源戰略整合期的重要支撐。在 2026 年這個行業關鍵分化期，全新深藍 S05 的登場，或許正是深藍從「中國主流」駛向「全球主場」道路上，最堅實的那一步。
Written by | Zhang Linyu
Edited by | Zhang Nan
Designed by | Zhen Youmei
At 4:30 PM Central Time on July 22, Tesla's Q2 earnings call began, with little mention of its traditional automotive business.
During the Q&A session, analysts no longer asked when the low-cost model colloquially known as Model 2 would go into mass production. Tesla has never officially used this name, nor did they inquire about the progress of the next-generation model.
Elon Musk and his core executives shared information with the audience regarding FSD (Full Self-Driving, Tesla's fully autonomous driving software, which still requires driver supervision at all times in the current version), Robotaxi, Optimus robot, and chip factory.
This forms a certain contrast with Tesla's current revenue structure.
Revenue Increase Without Profit Increase
In Q2 2026, Tesla delivered a total of 480,126 vehicles globally, a 25% year-over-year increase and a 34% quarter-over-quarter increase, marking the company's best Q2 delivery record, second only to the historical record of 497,099 vehicles set in Q3 2025.
Among them, 467,762 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles were delivered, accounting for 97.4% of total deliveries; other models including Model S, Model X, Cybertruck, and Semi trucks totaled 12,364 deliveries, accounting for only 2.6%.
Production for the same period was 451,758 units. Deliveries exceeded production by 28,368 units, and global vehicle inventory days dropped from 27 days in the previous quarter to 15 days.
Tesla did not disclose absolute sales by region for Q2, but Chief Financial Officer Vaibhav Taneja revealed that compared to Q1, deliveries grew 60% in the Americas, 27% in Asia-Pacific, and 12% in EMEA. He also stated that Tesla ended Q2 with the largest order backlog since 2023.
The shareholder letter listed the markets where Q2 delivery records were set: South Korea, Australia, Colombia, Japan, Taiwan, Thailand, Portugal, Philippines, Chile, Slovenia, and Lithuania. Taneja additionally noted that Model Y set sales records in the Netherlands, Australia, and New Zealand.
Sales grew, but profits did not increase correspondingly.
In Q2, Tesla's total revenue was $28.236 billion, up 26% year-over-year, marking the first time revenue over the past 12 months exceeded $100 billion. Among them, automotive business revenue was $20.516 billion, up 23% year-over-year, accounting for 72.7% of total revenue; energy generation and storage business revenue was $3.139 billion, up 13%; service and other business revenue was $4.581 billion, up 50%, becoming the fastest-growing business.
Tesla's gross profit for the quarter was $4.751 billion, up 23% year-over-year; GAAP gross margin was 16.8%, down 41 basis points from 17.2% in the same period last year.
Operating profit was only $398 million, down 57% year-over-year; operating margin dropped from 4.1% to 1.4% compared to the same period last year.
In other words, Tesla's revenue increased by $5.74 billion year-over-year, but operating profit decreased by $525 million.
One source of pressure on profits came from expenses. In Q2, Tesla's R&D expenses reached $2.371 billion, up 49% year-over-year; sales, general, and administrative expenses reached $1.982 billion, up 45%. The two expenses totaled $4.353 billion, almost eating up all gross profit.
The shareholder letter attributed expense growth to three areas: R&D projects such as AI, equity incentives (including 2025 CEO compensation plan), and sales and admin expenses. Equity incentive expenses were $1.151 billion pre-tax this quarter, compared to $635 million in the same period last year.
Automotive regulatory credit revenue dropped from $439 million last year to $146 million, down 67% year-over-year; it was $380 million last quarter. The $7,500 U.S. federal EV tax credit expired on September 30, 2025; after federal law amendments, fines for automakers failing to meet fuel economy standards were zeroed out, removing the motivation to buy Tesla credits.
Automotive business GAAP gross margin was 16.9%; automotive gross margin excluding regulatory credit revenue was 16.3%, higher than 15.0% in the same period last year, but significantly lower than 19.2% in Q1 this year.
Taneja explained that Q1 automotive gross margin was helped by approximately $230 million in reserve reversals for warranties and tariff reductions; these benefits did not repeat in Q2; excluding these impacts, automotive gross margin excluding credits was roughly flat with the previous quarter.
In the attribution of revenue and profit in the shareholder letter, 'decline in average selling price per vehicle' is listed as a negative factor in two places.
The energy business also saw 'revenue increase without profit increase'.
In Q2, Tesla's energy storage deployment reached 13.5 GWh, up 41% year-over-year and 53% quarter-over-quarter, the second-highest quarter in history. However, due to approximately $240 million in warranty expenses caused by supplier cell issues, the energy business gross margin dropped from 39.5% in Q1 to 20.4%.
Service and other businesses became one of the few clear profit growth points.
This business's gross profit grew from $166 million in the same period last year to $648 million, an increase of $302 million quarter-over-quarter; gross margin rose from 5.5% last year and 9.2% last quarter to 14.1%, a historic high.
Tesla's GAAP net profit for the quarter was $1.114 billion, down 5% year-over-year; diluted EPS was $0.32, down 3% year-over-year.
This $1.114 billion includes an unrealized gain from a SpaceX equity investment, $1.005 billion pre-tax and $763 million after-tax. Tesla bought this SpaceX equity for $2.002 billion in Q1 2026, realizing a paper gain of $1.005 billion one quarter later.
Taneja said this approximately $1 billion gain was offset by approximately $300 million in foreign exchange losses and about $100 million in Bitcoin losses. On the income statement, the total 'Other income (expense), net' for the quarter was $590 million.
Excluding equity incentives, SpaceX paper gains, digital asset fluctuations, and special tax items, Tesla's non-GAAP net profit was $1.153 billion, down 17% year-over-year; non-GAAP diluted EPS was $0.33, down 18% year-over-year.
In Q2, Tesla's operating cash flow was $4.697 billion, up 85% year-over-year; capital expenditures reached $5.789 billion, up 142% year-over-year, resulting in $1.092 billion of negative free cash flow.
The company expects capital expenditures for the full year 2026 to exceed $25 billion, and capex will continue to grow in the next two to three years.
As of the end of June, Tesla held $43.524 billion in cash, cash equivalents, and short-term investments, down $1.219 billion from Q1.
Automotive remains Tesla's largest revenue source and the foundation supporting cash flow and capital expenditures, but the earnings call is no longer about cars.
Elon Musk Only Discussed Three Things
After the earnings call began, Elon Musk sounded emotionally down. He later explained to analysts that he was sick that day, 'If I sound a bit off, it's because I'm sick today and feeling unwell.'
He briefly mentioned three things.
The first thing was Cybercab. He announced that Cybercab production has started at the Texas Gigafactory. As a two-seater model designed specifically for Robotaxi with no steering wheel or pedals, Cybercab is seen as the core carrier for Tesla shifting from selling cars to operating an autonomous driving fleet. Tesla has provided Cybercab ride experiences for employees within the Texas factory campus since July.
However, Cybercab will not scale up rapidly in the short term.
Since it uses a completely new chassis, Tesla must first let test vehicles equipped with steering wheels, accelerator pedals, and brake pedals accumulate sufficient driving data to complete the autonomous driving system calibration for the Cybercab chassis.
The second thing was the Optimus robot.
Musk again called Optimus 'the largest product ever', but he also admitted this will be the hardest product for Tesla to date to achieve mass production.
Cars at least have mature supply chains for tires, glass, mirrors, and body parts, but almost all components of Optimus need to be redesigned and supply systems established.
Tesla has dismantled the Model S and Model X production lines at the Fremont factory and started installing the first-generation Optimus production line; the Optimus building at the Texas factory is also under construction.
The shareholder letter said the first batch of Optimus will be deployed within Tesla's Optimus Academy for collecting training data and developing features.
Musk stated that Optimus production ramp will follow a typical S-curve, but due to many new components, the initial flat phase of the curve will be very long.
Musk hopes the third-generation Optimus will eventually reach an annual production of 1 million units, and the fourth generation 10 million units. However, he immediately emphasized these are ideal targets, and achieving true mass production is 'surprisingly difficult'.
The third thing was the chip factory.
This is a massive chip manufacturing project in cooperation between Tesla and SpaceX. Terafab not only produces logic chips but also covers storage chips, advanced packaging, testing, and photomask manufacturing.
Musk did not disclose the site location at the earnings call, only stating there will soon be a separate launch event because this project 'deserves its own day' and should not be squeezed into an earnings call.
He envisioned placing photomask manufacturing, logic chips, storage chips, packaging, and testing in the same building to shorten chip design and validation cycles.
Terafab's main task is not to produce traditional chips for cars, but to solve the AI computing power needed for future large-scale Optimus mass production.
Musk believes that without its own chip manufacturing capability, Optimus will eventually be constrained by AI chip supply.
There was another chip statement in the shareholder letter: Tesla's semiconductor wafer fab in Austin is advancing construction and equipment procurement; the project is still in early stages, aiming to build its own chip manufacturing capability to ensure long-term supply of logic and storage chips. The full shareholder letter does not mention Terafab.
June 4, 2026, Hsinchu, Taiwan, TSMC 2026 Annual Shareholders' Meeting.
A corporate shareholder representative asked TSMC Chairman and CEO C.C. Wei how he viewed Musk building his own wafer fab. Wei said: 'My only comment is to 'bless him'.' He also said TSMC has never lacked opponents; the only way to face them is to continue to strive and win.
Cybercab, Optimus, and Terafab form the main axis of Musk's entire narrative at this earnings call. The traditional automotive business only exists as a cash source and AI implementation platform.
The Limitation on Production Is Not Demand, but Battery Packs
The shareholder letter stated in two places that battery pack capacity is the main limiting factor for recent vehicle production increases. Taneja added at the meeting that production growth will be limited by supply chains, not just batteries, but also electronic components.
In the same quarter, Tesla faced the largest order backlog since 2023.
As of the end of Q2, Tesla's paid FSD subscriptions reached 1.48 million, up 56% year-over-year; global paid users approached 1.5 million, with 55% one-time purchase and 45% subscription. Over 55% of new cars in North America had FSD subscriptions activated at delivery.
The shareholder letter stated Tesla has pushed FSD v14 lite to vehicles equipped with AI3 hardware in the U.S. and South Korea, by distilling driving behaviors from the v14 series on AI4 into the camera and compute configuration of AI3.
Hardware 3 and Hardware 4 correspond to AI3 and AI4. Musk said in the Q&A session that upgrading vehicles below Hardware 4 'will eventually be economically reasonable', but Tesla public documents have no hardware upgrade plans.
The shareholder letter listed nine Robotaxi metro areas: California's SF Bay Area with safety drivers; Texas Austin, Dallas, Houston and Florida Miami, Orlando, Tampa in unsupervised operational ramp-up phase; Arizona Phoenix, Nevada Las Vegas in preparation.
Tesla claimed Robotaxi is online in 7 major metro areas, cumulatively driving over 380,000 miles safely with no accident records.
Analyst Q&A Transcript
Below is the transcript of the Q&A session from Tesla's Q2 2026 Earnings Call, compiled by this publication from the conference call recording, with omissions.
Earnings Call Executive List
Host: Travis Axelrod (Travis Axelrod, Head of Investor Relations at Tesla)
Musk (Elon Musk, Tesla Co-founder and CEO)
Vaibhav Taneja (Vaibhav Taneja, Tesla CFO)
Ashok Elluswamy
Karn Budhiraj
Lars Moravy (Lars Moravy, Vice President of Vehicle Engineering at Tesla)
Brandon Ehrhart (Brandon Ehrhart, Tesla General Counsel and Corporate Secretary)
Q1: Currently there is no mature Optimus supply chain, so Tesla has to do much of the work internally. In the process of advancing this, are there suppliers willing to co-invest with you to establish local manufacturing capability in the U.S., helping Tesla achieve scale faster? From an investment cycle perspective, having partners advance together could improve capital efficiency. How do you consider this?
Musk: Our suppliers are performing exceptionally well. To support Optimus, Robotaxi, and other projects, they have invested and are continuing to invest huge funds.
Especially Samsung Electronics and TSMC, both building wafer fabs. TSMC is building in Arizona, Samsung is building in Texas, investing tens of billions of dollars to produce AI computing chips for Optimus and Robotaxi.
Panasonic has also invested billions of dollars to expand battery production.
Please excuse me, I'm feeling a bit unwell today, slightly sick. If my voice sounds off, it's because I'm indeed feeling unwell today.
Our partners are all excellent. I want to thank them for their support, their investments, and their hard work.
Karn Budhiraj: I want to add a point on this basis. A significant portion of Samsung's wafer fab capacity will be used for future projects. This is a massive investment involving billions of dollars.
We also see investment of similar scale in the storage chip sector. Additionally, investment has emerged in some new dedicated parts areas, such as metal injection molding parts, flexible printed circuits, and various non-traditional technologies. These technologies are mostly designed for robots, differing from our traditional automotive supply chains in the past.
In some areas, if we cannot find suitable partners, we never hesitate to move production internally. We have a very strong manufacturing engineering team and design team that can help us scale up production of these products.
Musk: I also want to thank Micron Technology (Micron Technology, U.S. storage chip manufacturer) for allocating storage chip capacity for us. They must make some very difficult decisions on storage chip capacity allocation. Given the crazy high price of storage chips today, we are very grateful that Micron is willing to reserve space for Tesla in the coming years and allocate considerable capacity to us under reasonable terms.
Q2: Regulations in U.S. states seem to be changing, possibly involving sensor configuration requirements. For Robotaxi deployment, what approach do you want regulators to take? To avoid excessive regulation while ensuring Robotaxi lands correctly, what regulatory environment do you hope to see?
Lars Moravy: When discussing regulations, especially the U.S. regulatory environment, significant progress has been made. The federal government has taken very proactive measures around the 'Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards' (FMVSS), beginning to accept and promote specifically designed autonomous vehicles. We are very grateful for the support from the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) in this regard.
As for individual states, some recent movements in New Jersey are obviously somewhat disappointing.
But as Ashok said in his opening remarks, what we really care about is the vehicle's own performance. Ultimately, it is product performance that drives regulators and the public to accept this technology.
I believe the best way to regulate is to set a goal or task for companies and innovators, then let us find solutions ourselves. If some regulations define the solution before clearly stating the problem, we certainly won't welcome that practice.
Tesla has always proven itself with actual performance in the past, and will continue to do so in the future. This will also become the foundation for our continued expansion.
Q3: Next, what milestones should investors focus on? After reaching which milestones will you accelerate Robotaxi fleet expansion or market deployment? Is it further safety validation, such as mileage per accident, or other metrics? Additionally, will you consider partnering with third parties like ride-hailing platforms to increase vehicle utilization, or continue to maintain full vertical integration?
Musk: We expect Robotaxi to adopt a vertical integration model, like Tesla's other businesses. I don't think Robotaxi will face a problem of insufficient demand. Its economics will be extremely attractive, with many people wanting to use this service, and demand will exceed our service capacity. In this case, vertical integration is obviously the choice.
The real issue is just what we call the progression of reliability 'multiple 9s'. That is, to scale up, how many 9s of reliability does the system actually need to reach?
Ideally, we want reliability to reach 99.999999%. I believe the only limitation to Robotaxi growth is moving towards more 9s of reliability.
Q4: Outsiders have been discussing the possibility of SpaceX and Tesla merging in some way. The two companies have already carried out extensive cooperation. Will merging the two companies eventually produce synergies? As time passes, is this reasonable?
Musk: As everyone can see from the extensive cooperation carried out by the two companies in many fields, the overlap between their businesses is increasing, especially the Terafab project. This will be a true massive project.
But obviously, we cannot discuss matters like company mergers on an earnings conference call. Such matters must be carried out according to appropriate procedures.
Brandon Ehrhart: We have always benefited from our relationship with SpaceX. SpaceX is an excellent partner, and we have conducted many transactions beneficial to both parties with them.
Earlier this year, we deepened the relationship between the two sides through an investment and a framework agreement. This will enable us to continue working with SpaceX to advance the projects Elon just mentioned, such as Terafab and Digital Optimus.
Musk: Additionally, there are many other collaborations. Grok (the large model of Musk's AI company xAI) has now been integrated into the car, and Grok is also helping drive Digital Optimus. Starlink (SpaceX's satellite internet service) is being integrated into Cybercab. In the future, Starlink will also be integrated into all our automotive products, at least in markets where Starlink is already operating.
Because in Robotaxi application scenarios, the network must cover all places.
Even in Silicon Valley, there are many places with very poor mobile network signals, sometimes even no signal at all. When I drive to work, the first 10 to 15 minutes I cannot actually make calls because the mobile network connection is too poor.
We cannot let Robotaxi enter these 'Bermuda Triangles' lacking mobile network connections and get stuck there. Starlink can provide network connections anywhere, so it is very important. This avoids Robotaxi losing connection.
If people are sitting in the car, they might want to handle work efficiently, or they might hope to get an entertainment experience. With Starlink, people can watch 4K live sports events in the car, and the cost per GB of data is very low. This is actually difficult to achieve through mobile communication networks.
Vaibhav Taneja: You can understand this from the Cybercab ride experience. In a world where you don't need to focus on driving, all the time you sit in the car can be used for other things, whether attending conference calls, watching movies, or doing other activities.
Therefore, if you observe the design of Cybercab, you will see it is equipped with a very large screen.
We have started providing Cybercab ride experiences within the Austin factory. In the not-so-distant future, consumers will also be able to experience it. Once you truly experience it, you will understand why network connections become so important.
Q5: Currently Robotaxi is constantly adding operating cities, but according to media reports, the number of vehicles seems to still be only dozens, not hundreds. Why not concentrate on expanding the scale of Austin or one or two cities first? To achieve higher deployment volume in a major city, what else do you need to solve?
Ashok Elluswamy: The reason we chose to expand to different cities instead of focusing on only one city is that we want to ensure the tech stack has strong generality.
It is indeed a general system. We just want to prove to ourselves and the outside world that this system can run in many different cities, and entering each city does not require investing too much extra work. This is exactly what we see internally.
As Elon just mentioned, the growth rate is actually rising exponentially, it's just that it's currently in the early stage of the exponential curve, so the outside world finds it hard to understand this growth.
As for whether to focus on mileage or vehicle count, since vehicles in the Robotaxi fleet will basically run continuously, while human drivers might only use vehicles a few hours a day, there is a huge difference between the two.
These vehicles will operate continuously for the vast majority of the time. This means that even if the number of vehicles is small, a large amount of mileage can be generated. Therefore, we focus more on unsupervised driving mileage rather than simply the number of vehicles.
We hope to operate a very efficient fleet. All work that improves operational efficiency will further increase the mileage each vehicle in the fleet can contribute.
Vaibhav Taneja: We are trying to expand this business, while also ensuring to solve various problems that may exist. These problems involve not only software but also operations, and we are also working on handling them. Therefore, we hope to first expand the geographic coverage, and before truly large-scale deployment, solve these problems through a smaller, controllable fleet.
Musk: Regarding Cybercab, one point needs special explanation. Because Cybercab uses a completely new vehicle chassis, before mass deployment, we must accumulate driving data specifically for Cybercab.
Model 3, Model Y, and other models already have millions of cars driving on the road, we have a lot of data, but Cybercab does not yet have such data foundation.
We must first let Cybercab equipped with devices such as steering wheels, accelerator pedals, and brake pedals accumulate mileage, thereby completing system calibration for the Cybercab chassis.
When we establish sufficient confidence in this, everyone will see a significant increase in the number of Cybercabs in various cities.
Lars Moravy: Another reason to point out is that total cost of ownership and transportation regulatory environments are not the same between different cities and different states. Currently, there is no unified federal regulatory framework.
The reason we expand city by city is to ensure we can meet these requirements separately and respond to the specific requirements of each city as much as possible.
We must enter every city to meet local requirements. We will continue to do this, and expand the scale further after meeting all conditions.
Q6: The U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is pushing to cancel pedals and steering wheels. Will these become factors limiting Cybercab production expansion? At the federal level, are there any other problems that need to be solved to truly release your ability to expand Cybercab scale?
Lars Moravy: The short answer is, no. We maintain a very good relationship with the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, especially with Administrator Jonathan Morrison.
I think they are just catering to public demand and the trend known worldwide to be coming. They are trying to stay ahead of the trend to ensure appropriate measures are taken.
In the past few years, we have always honestly introduced our plans and ongoing work to them.
I don't want to say the two sides are completely in step, but I feel we have a partner there, and both sides are advancing relevant work together.
[Editor's Note: Morrison was confirmed by the U.S. Senate to serve as NHTSA Administrator on September 18, 2025. He served as NHTSA General Counsel from 2017 to 2021. Before returning to NHTSA in 2025, he was responsible for legal, regulatory, government affairs, and policy in Apple's Special Projects Group (i.e., Apple's car project)]
Q7: Starlink has been integrated into Cybercab. Can Cybercab in turn become a remote hotspot for Starlink mobile services? Also, when do you expect to start developing autonomous driving for Tesla Semi? Considering the shortage of truck drivers, autonomous driving trucks also seem to be a market of large scale.
Musk: As you mentioned, there is indeed a very serious shortage of truck drivers now. Not enough people are willing to drive trucks, and trucks are crucial for U.S. freight transportation. Autonomous Semi will be very important for solving the truck driver shortage problem and also helps improve safety.
For Tesla Semi still driven by truck drivers, autonomous driving functions will also significantly improve driving safety and comfort.
Since the number of Tesla Semis is currently still very small, even by the end of this year, its proportion in Tesla's total vehicles will still be very low, therefore, it is reasonable to prioritize autonomous driving R&D resources for high-volume models.
We will prioritize solving the autonomous driving problems of Model 3, Model Y, and Cybercab, truly making these models achieve universal, unsupervised autonomous driving.
We expect Tesla Semi's autonomous driving function might be realized by the end of this year or early next year. I just don't want the Semi project to distract our attention from continuously improving safety reliability and moving towards more 9s on Model 3, Model Y, and Cybercab.
Therefore, in the next approximately six months, the priority of the autonomous Semi project will be slightly pushed back. However, it will definitely be achievable next year and able to catch up with Tesla Semi's process of large-scale production increase.
As for communication, we might treat the Starlink terminals in Tesla cars as mobile communication base stations, or some kind of network connection relay towers, providing network relay to mobile phones on the ground and anyone who wants to use Wi-Fi.
Obviously, fixed Starlink terminals can also provide similar services. [Editor's Note: Shareholder letter states Tesla Semi will start production at a new factory in Nevada this year]
Q8: Optimus will use microprocessors, microcontrollers, actuators, and other semiconductors. Tesla can purchase from the market, design them themselves and hand them over to third-party wafer fabs for manufacturing, or design and produce them themselves. For these components, which approach do you prefer?
Musk: Optimus uses a large number of highly specialized power electronic devices and circuit boards. All of these are designed by Tesla, but the manufacturing work is completed by suppliers.
Fourth-generation Optimus will be produced in Austin. Compared to third-generation products, the supply system of fourth-generation Optimus will achieve a higher degree of vertical integration.
Our goal is for the production volume of fourth-generation Optimus to be an order of magnitude higher than third-generation products. Ideally, the annual production of third-generation Optimus will be 1 million units, and fourth-generation products will reach 10 million units per year.
Of course, all relevant cautionary statements need to be added here, because scaling up production is an extremely difficult task.
Fourth-generation Optimus will adopt a higher degree of vertical integration. Therefore, at that time we may complete a large amount of printed circuit board related work internally.
Q9: Does Tesla still plan to upgrade Hardware 3 to Hardware 4 in order to run V15 and future versions of FSD? Will existing vehicles still undergo hardware upgrades?
Musk: I think upgrading all vehicles below Hardware 4 will eventually be economically reasonable, basically all cars already equipped with cameras.
If there is not even a camera system, the required modifications might be too many. For any vehicle already designed around the camera system, upgrading at a certain point in time will be economically reasonable. I think we hope to upgrade these vehicles directly to the next-generation AI compute board.
Specifically, there might be two options. We have an upgraded AI4 chip, with a certain degree of improvement compared to AI4, which might go into production around mid-next year. Then there is AI5, we hope AI5 can also achieve mass production around mid-next year. AI5 will initially be applied to Optimus.
Currently, we have made very good progress in AI5. Tesla's chip team is performing excellently, advancing AI5 R&D at an unbelievable speed.
I am very excited about the design of Tesla's AI6 chip. I think it will become the world's best edge computing chip. If someone owns a better chip, I really want to meet him and shake hands, because the AI6 chip is really too excellent.
Progress in chips is very smooth. Thank you again to TSMC, Samsung, and Micron for their support.
Q10: In the current round of capital expenditure cycle, to what extent is the investment speed limited by efficiency? If investment continues to increase, will it lead to a decrease in capital efficiency? To what extent does the capital expenditure speed determine Tesla's progress in lifting supply constraints?
Musk: The requirement I put to the Tesla team is that as long as it doesn't cause excessive waste, we should carry out capital expenditure as quickly as possible.
We are not pursuing extreme high efficiency of capital investment, because that would slow down project progress. We need to strike a balance between capital efficiency and time.
If the project can be completed earlier, then slightly lower capital efficiency is acceptable, because from the company's perspective, this will actually bring higher net present value.
Overall, I am quite satisfied with the current progress. We are carrying out construction and capacity expansion of astonishing scale in multiple completely different fields simultaneously.
I think, previously no company has advanced so much work on such a large scale at the same time. Perhaps when Henry Ford expanded Model T production, it was close to this situation in relative scale; or during World War II, enterprises once tried to massively expand weapon production.
I think, this might be the fastest industrial-scale expansion in the United States since World War II.
Vaibhav Taneja: If you observe our capital expenditure, you will find that all expenditures are used to build assets that can be put into production. We are expanding various factories, including Optimus factories, Cybercab factories, Lithium Iron Phosphate Battery factories that started production earlier this year, Semi factories, and even semiconductor wafer factories.
In addition, we also plan to build large-scale solar manufacturing capacity in the U.S., raising the scale of solar manufacturing in the U.S. by an order of magnitude. This point is very important, the importance of solar manufacturing is underestimated.
None of this work is easy. To build a factory, you must start from zero. Due to too many construction projects underway, Tesla eventually became the general contractor for almost all construction projects.
We are expanding at a very fast speed. This means we need to advance many things simultaneously. Therefore, we can only move forward at the fastest speed humans can reach to ensure these projects can truly operate in the real world.
Musk: I think our capital expenditure efficiency is good beyond conventional scales.
Q11: In the foreseeable future, to what extent will the energy storage business be limited by supply? Of the current energy storage projects, how much is used for public utility peak shaving and valley filling, and how much is used to solve power quality problems caused by drastic fluctuations in electricity consumption at data centers? What is the state of demand in the data center and utility sectors respectively?
Musk: This is not just peak shaving and valley filling, it also includes grid balancing. Battery packs are not only activated for short periods. For balancing the power generated by wind power and solar power, batteries are an excellent tool.
In the future, the vast majority of global energy will be produced through a combination of solar and batteries. All Starlink satellites are also powered by solar panels and batteries. You can completely imagine the Earth as a huge satellite.
The energy the sun can provide far exceeds any other energy source. We believe that power constraints will become a major problem facing AI. In fact, it is already a major problem.
Just starting AI computers requires consuming a large amount of power. The power demand for AI computing is very high, and even super-large cloud computing companies find it difficult to find enough power for AI computing and smoothly enable relevant equipment.
In addition, power fluctuations must be suppressed. Especially during AI model training, power demand will change drastically in a very short time.
During a training process, power consumption might drop 70% within 100 milliseconds. This requires very fast-responding advanced power electronic equipment to suppress large power changes, especially changes during AI model training.
This is why SpaceX bought a large number of Megapacks (Tesla's large-scale energy storage product) for data centers. They are mainly used to suppress power fluctuations appearing during training. Batteries can also help data centers obtain more power from the grid.
If you tell utility companies that during the few hours or days with the worst power usage conditions in the year, they don't need to supply power to you because batteries can undertake the power supply task, then they will be easier to provide power access to you.
In fact, the best way to increase the total output of energy in the United States might be to use batteries on a large scale. The United States has about 1.2 to 1.3 terawatts of power generation capacity, but the average power consumption is only about 0.5 terawatts. That is to say, the power generation capacity in the United States is about 2.5 times the average power consumption.
This means that by just using batteries, the energy output of the United States could potentially double. Therefore, we believe that the demand for Megapacks in the future market will be very high.
In Malaysia's SUV market, many buyers compare Proton X50 and Mazda CX-3 when choosing a car. The two models are quite close in price and positioning. Today, we will make a detailed comparison from multiple aspects to help you save time on research.
Proton X50 OTR price in Malaysia is RM 89,800 - 113,300, with a total of 4 versions, including 1.5T Executive (RM 89,800), 1.5T Premium (RM 101,800), 1.5T Flagship (RM 113,300), etc.
Mazda CX-3 OTR price in Malaysia is RM 126,159 - 139,159, with a total of 2 versions, including 2023 2.0L High (RM 139,159), 2023 2.0L Plus (RM 126,159), etc.
From the price perspective, Proton X50's starting price is indeed RM 36,359 cheaper than Mazda CX-3. If your budget is limited, Proton's entry-level version can already meet daily needs. However, note that the few thousand cheaper might involve trade-offs in features, depending on your specific needs.
Proton X50 comes with 1.5L 4-cyl, 105 hp power. Official fuel consumption 6.0 L/100km.
Mazda CX-3 comes with 1.5L Turbo, 140 hp power. Official fuel consumption 7.0 L/100km.
In terms of power, Mazda CX-3's 1.5L Turbo has 35 hp more than Proton X50's 1.5L 4-cyl. However, for daily city driving, both cars have sufficient power, you won't feel it's lacking.
Proton X50 safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP), active safety systems include ADAS (ACC, AEB, LKA, LDA, BSM, RCTA).
Mazda CX-3 safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP), active safety system includes i-Activsense.
Both cars have the same safety rating, safety features are quite comprehensive for this class. New cars nowadays have good safety, no need to worry too much about this.
Proton X50 adopts 4WD drive system.
Mazda CX-3 adopts FWD drive system.
Proton's 4WD and Mazda's FWD will feel different in handling, test drive comparison is recommended.
Proton X50 and Mazda CX-3 are both mainstream choices in the Malaysian market, suitable for family use and daily commuting. If you value brand reputation and resale value more, prioritize the one with better reputation; if you care more about cost-performance ratio and features, choose the model with richer configurations. Ultimately, it is recommended to test drive both, personal experience is the most important.
Overall, Proton X50 and Mazda CX-3 are both very good models in the Malaysian market. Which one to choose depends mainly on your personal needs and budget. We recommend doing your research, comparing quotes from multiple dealerships, then test driving to make a final decision. Buying a car is a big matter, spending time on research is never wrong.
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嗰陣，都會拿 Proton X50 同 Toyota Corolla Cross 做比較。這兩款車喺價位同定位上都幾接近，今日我哋就從多個方面做詳細比較，幫你省返做功課嘅時間。
Proton X50 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 89,800 - 113,300，總共 4 個版本，包括 1.5T Executive（RM 89,800）、1.5T Premium（RM 101,800）、1.5T Flagship（RM 113,300） 等。
Toyota Corolla Cross 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 133,800 - 148,800，總共 3 個版本，包括 2026 HEV 1.8L GR Sport（RM 148,800）、2026 HEV 1.8L Standard（RM 140,800）、2026 1.8L Standard（RM 133,800） 等。
由價錢睇，Proton X50 嘅入門價確實比 Toyota Corolla Cross 平咗 RM 44,000。如果你預算有限，Proton 嘅入門版已經夠滿足日常需要。但都要留意，平嗰幾千蚊，喺配備上會有取捨，具體要睇你嘅需要。
Proton X50 配備 1.5L 4-cyl，馬力 105 hp。官方油耗 6.0 L/100km。
Toyota Corolla Cross 配備 1.5L Turbo，馬力 140 hp。官方油耗 7.0 L/100km。
動力方面，Toyota Corolla Cross 嘅 1.5L Turbo 比 Proton X50 嘅 1.5L 4-cyl 多咗 35 匹馬力。不過日常喺市區行，兩款車嘅動力都夠用，唔會覺得夠唔力。
Proton X50 嘅安全評級係 5★ (ASEAN NCAP)，主動安全系統包括 ADAS (ACC, AEB, LKA, LDA, BSM, RCTA)。
Toyota Corolla Cross 嘅安全評級係 5★ (ASEAN NCAP)，主動安全系統包括 TSS (PCS, LDA, ACC, LTA)。
兩款車嘅安全評級一樣，喺呢個級別入面，安全配備都算好齊全。而家嘅新車安全性都唔差，唔使太擔心呢一點。
Proton X50 採用 4WD 驅動方式。
Toyota Corolla Cross 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
Proton 嘅 4WD 同 Toyota 嘅 FWD 喺操控上會有唔同感受，建議試駕對比。
總體嚟講，Proton X50 同 Toyota Corolla Cross 都係馬來西亞市場幾唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵都要睇你嘅個人需要同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，先至去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花啲時間做功課絕對無錯。
In Malaysia's SUV market, many buyers compare Perodua Aruz and Mazda CX-5 when choosing a car. These two cars are quite close in price and positioning. Today we will make a detailed comparison from multiple aspects to help you save time on research.
The OTR price of Perodua Aruz in Malaysia is RM 72,900 - 77,900, there are 2 versions in total, including 1.5L X (RM 72,900), 1.5L AV (RM 77,900), etc.
The OTR price of Mazda CX-5 in Malaysia is RM 135,469 - 166,760, there are 3 versions in total, including 2025 2.0L AT 35th Anniversary (RM 316,154), 2025 2.0L AT (RM 296,154), 2025 2.0L MT (RM 294,154), etc.
From a price perspective, the starting price of Perodua Aruz is indeed RM 62,569 cheaper than Mazda CX-5. If your budget is limited, Perodua's entry-level version can already meet daily needs. But note, the few thousand Ringgit saved might involve trade-offs in equipment, it depends on your specific needs.
Perodua Aruz is equipped with 1.5L 4-cyl, horsepower 105 hp. Official fuel consumption 6.0 L/100km.
Mazda CX-5 is equipped with 1.5L Turbo, horsepower 140 hp. Official fuel consumption 7.0 L/100km.
In terms of power, Mazda CX-5's 1.5L Turbo has 35 more horsepower than Perodua Aruz's 1.5L 4-cyl. However, for daily city driving, both cars have enough power, you won't feel it's lacking.
Perodua Aruz safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP), active safety systems include .
Mazda CX-5 safety rating is 5★ (ASEAN NCAP), active safety systems include .
Both cars have the same safety rating, safety equipment in this class is quite comprehensive. New cars nowadays have good safety, there is no need to worry too much about this.
Perodua Aruz warranty 5 years/150,000km, maintenance interval every 10,000km or 6 months.
Mazda CX-5 warranty 5 years/150,000km, maintenance interval every 10,000km or 6 months.
Both cars have the same warranty conditions, there is no need to struggle with this aspect. Actual maintenance cost depends on the brand's service network and parts price, suggest asking real owners in car owner groups for experience.
Overall, Perodua Aruz and Mazda CX-5 are both very good models in the Malaysia market. Which one to choose depends mainly on your personal needs and budget. We suggest doing research, compare quotes from several dealerships, then test drive to make a final decision. Buying a car is a major matter, spending some time doing research will never be wrong.
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嘅時候都會拿 Perodua Aruz 同 Chery Tiggo 8 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價位同定位上都相當接近，今日我哋由多個方面嚟做一個詳細嘅比較，幫你節省做功課嘅時間。
Perodua Aruz 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 72,900 - 77,900，總共有 2 個版本，包括 1.5L X（RM 72,900）、1.5L AV（RM 77,900） 等。
Chery Tiggo 8 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 129,750 - 129,750，總共有 1 個版本，包括 2026 1.6T Standard（RM 129,750） 等。
由價錢睇落嚟，Perodua Aruz 嘅起步價的確比 Chery Tiggo 8 平咗 RM 56,850。如果你預算有限，Perodua 嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需求。但都要留意，平嗰幾千蚊，可能喺配備上會有取捨，具體要看你嘅需求。
Perodua Aruz 嘅安全評級係 5★ (ASEAN NCAP)，主動安全系統包括。
Chery Tiggo 8 嘅安全評級係 TBD，主動安全系統包括 Basic。
Perodua Aruz 車身長 4400 mm，後尾箱 400 L。
Chery Tiggo 8 車身長 4400 mm，後尾箱 400 L。
兩款車嘅尺寸幾乎一樣，車內空間差別唔大。呢個級別嘅車，日常使用完全夠用。
Perodua Aruz 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
Chery Tiggo 8 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
兩款車嘅驅動方式一樣，都係 FWD，日常駕駛感受唔會有太大分別。
總體嚟講，Perodua Aruz 同 Chery Tiggo 8 都係馬來西亞市場好唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵仲係要看你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對無錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嘅時候都會拿 Perodua Aruz 同 Chery Tiggo 8 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價錢同定位上都幾接近，我哋而家就從多個方面做一個詳細嘅對比，幫你省下做功課嘅時間。
Perodua Aruz 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 72,900 - 77,900，一共有 2 個版本，包括 1.5L X（RM 72,900）、1.5L AV（RM 77,900） 等。
Chery Tiggo 8 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 129,750 - 129,750，一共有 1 個版本，包括 2026 1.6T Standard（RM 129,750） 等。
從價錢睇落嚟，Perodua Aruz 嘅起步行車價真係比 Chery Tiggo 8 平咗 RM 56,850。如果你預算有限，Perodua 嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需要。但都要留意，平啲嘅幾千塊，可能喺配備上會有取舍，具體要看你嘅需要。
Perodua Aruz 搭載 1.5L 4-cyl，馬力 105 hp。官方油耗 6.0 L/100km。
Chery Tiggo 8 搭載 1.5L Turbo，馬力 140 hp。官方油耗 7.0 L/100km。
動力方面，Chery Tiggo 8 嘅 1.5L Turbo 比 Perodua Aruz 嘅 1.5L 4-cyl 多咗 35 匹馬力。不過日常喺市區開，兩款車嘅動力都夠用，唔會覺得唔夠力。
Perodua Aruz 車身長 4400 mm，後行李廂 400 L。
Chery Tiggo 8 車身長 4400 mm，後行李廂 400 L。
兩款車嘅尺寸幾乎一樣，車內空間分別唔大。呢個級別嘅車，日常使用完全夠用。
Perodua Aruz 同 Chery Tiggo 8 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更睇重品牌口碑同二手價，可以優先考慮口碑更好嗰一款；如果你更在意性價比同配備，就揀配置更豐富嗰款。還係最後建議兩款都去試駕，親自體驗先係最重要嘅。
總體嚟講，Perodua Aruz 同 Chery Tiggo 8 都係馬來西亞市場幾唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵都要睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花點時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嗰陣都會拎 寶路華 Ativa 同 馬自達 CX-30 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價位同定位上都幾接近，今日我哋就從多個方面做一個詳細嘅比較，幫你省下做功課嘅時間。
寶路華 Ativa 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 62,500 - 73,400，一共有 3 個版本，包括 1.0L Turbo X（RM 62,500）、1.0L Turbo H（RM 67,300）、1.0L Turbo AV（RM 73,400）等。
馬自達 CX-30 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 122,409 - 146,409，一共有 4 個版本，包括 2025 2.0L High+ Premium（RM 146,409）、2025 2.0L High+（RM 138,409）、2025 2.0L High（RM 130,409）等。
從價錢睇落，寶路華 Ativa 嘅起步價確實比 馬自達 CX-30 平咗 RM 59,909。如果你預算有限，寶路華嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需要。但要留意，平嗰幾千蚊，可能在配備上會有取舍，具體要看你嘅需要。
寶路華 Ativa 搭載 1.5L 4-cyl，馬力 105 hp。官方油耗 6.0 L/100km。
馬自達 CX-30 搭載 1.5L Turbo，馬力 140 hp。官方油耗 7.0 L/100km。
動力方面，馬自達 CX-30 嘅 1.5L Turbo 比 寶路華 Ativa 嘅 1.5L 4-cyl 多咗 35 匹馬力。不過日常喺市區開，兩款車嘅動力都夠用，唔會覺得唔夠力。
寶路華 Ativa 嘅安全評級係 5★ (ASEAN NCAP)，主動安全系統包括 ASA 3.0 + ACC + LDA + LKA + BSM + RCTA。
馬自達 CX-30 嘅安全評級係 5★ (ASEAN NCAP)，主動安全系統包括 i-Activsense。
兩款車嘅安全評級一樣，喺呢個級別入面安全配備都算好齊全。而家嘅新車安全性都唔差，唔使太擔心這一點。
寶路華 Ativa 車身長 4400 mm，行李箱 400 L。
馬自達 CX-30 車身長 4500 mm，行李箱 450 L。
空間方面，馬自達 CX-30 嘅車身比 寶路華 Ativa 長咗 100 mm，乘坐空間更有優勢。不過 寶路華 Ativa 喺城市入面停車會靈活啲，各有取舍。
寶路華 Ativa 同 馬自達 CX-30 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更睇重品牌口碑同二手價，可以優先考慮口碑更好嗰款；如果你更在意性價同配備，嗰就揀配置更豐富嗰款。最終都建議兩款都去試駕，親身體驗先係最重要。
總體嚟講，寶路華 Ativa 同 馬自達 CX-30 都係馬來西亞市場幾唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵始終係睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嘅時候都會拿 Perodua Ativa 同 Proton X50 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價位同定位上都好接近，今日我哋就從多個方面做一個詳細嘅比較，幫您節省做功課嘅時間。
Perodua Ativa 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 62,500 - 73,400，共有 3 個版本，包括 1.0L Turbo X（RM 62,500）、1.0L Turbo H（RM 67,300）、1.0L Turbo AV（RM 73,400） 等。
Proton X50 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 89,800 - 113,300，共有 4 個版本，包括 1.5T Executive（RM 89,800）、1.5T Premium（RM 101,800）、1.5T Flagship（RM 113,300） 等。
由價錢睇，Perodua Ativa 嘅起步價確實比 Proton X50 平咗 RM 27,300。如果你預算有限，Perodua 嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需要。但亦要留意，平幾千蚊，可能喺配備上會有取舍，具體要看你嘅需求。
Perodua Ativa 車身長 4400 mm，尾箱 400 L。
Proton X50 車身長 4400 mm，尾箱 400 L。
兩款車嘅尺寸幾乎一樣，車廂空間差別唔大。呢級嘅車，日常使用完全夠用。
Perodua Ativa 保養 5 年/150,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
Proton X50 保養 5 年/150,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
兩款車嘅保養條件一樣，呢方面唔使糾結。實際保養成本仲要睇品牌嘅服務網絡同零件價錢，建議去車友群問問真實車主嘅經驗。
Perodua Ativa 同 Proton X50 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更重視品牌口碑同二手價，可以優先考慮口碑好嗰款；如果你更在意性價比同配備，嗰就揀配置更豐富嗰款。最後都係建議兩款都去試車，親身經歷先係最重要。
總體嚟講，Perodua Ativa 同 Proton X50 都係馬來西亞市場好唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵都要睇你嘅個人需要同預算。建議大家做足功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試車做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嘅時候都會拿 Hyundai Palisade 同 Audi Q7 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價位同定位上都幾接近，今日我哋就從多個方面做一個詳細嘅比較，幫你省低做功課嘅時間。
Hyundai Palisade 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 368,838 - 399,838，一共有 4 個版本，包括 2023 3.8L 2WD Luxe 7 Seats Petrol（RM 399,838）、2023 2.2T 4WD Executive 7 Seats Diesel（RM 389,838）、2023 3.8L 2WD Luxe 8 Seats Petrol（RM 378,838）等。
Audi Q7 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 462,222 - 462,222，一共有 1 個版本，包括 Standard（RM 462,222）等。
從價錢睇落嚟，Hyundai Palisade 嘅起價確實比 Audi Q7 平咗 RM 93,384。如果你預算有限，Hyundai 嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需求。但亦都要注意，平嗰幾千蚊，可能喺配備上會有取捨，具體就要睇你嘅需求。
Hyundai Palisade 配備 2.0L Turbo，馬力 220 hp。官方油耗 9.5 L/100km。
Audi Q7 配備 3.0L Turbo，馬力 350 hp。官方油耗 12.0 L/100km。
動力方面，Audi Q7 嘅 3.0L Turbo 比 Hyundai Palisade 嘅 2.0L Turbo 多咗 130 匹馬力。不過日常喺市區開，兩款車嘅動力都夠用，唔會覺得唔夠力。
Hyundai Palisade 嘅安全評級係 TBD，主動安全系統包括 Basic。
Audi Q7 嘅安全評級係 5★ (Euro NCAP)，主動安全系統包括 Premium ADAS。
安全配備方面，兩款車都拿到唔錯嘅評級。不過 Hyundai Palisade 嘅 Basic 同 Audi Q7 嘅 Premium ADAS 喺功能上有些差異，如果你比較睇重主動安全嘅話，可以仔細比較一下兩者嘅功能列表。
Hyundai Palisade 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
Audi Q7 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
兩款車嘅驅動方式一樣，都係 FWD，日常駕駛感受唔會有太大分別。
Hyundai Palisade 同 Audi Q7 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更睇重品牌口碑同二手價，可以優先考慮口碑更好嗰一款；如果你更在意性價比同配備，就揀配置更豐富嗰款。最終始終建議兩款都去試駕，親身體驗先係最重要嘅。
總體嚟講，Hyundai Palisade 同 Audi Q7 都係馬來西亞市場幾唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一輛，關鍵始終都要睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對無錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅 SUV 市場，好多買家喺揀車嘅時候都會拿斯巴魯傲豹同梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 嚟做比較。呢兩款車喺價位同定位上都好接近，今日我哋就由多個方面做一個詳細嘅對比，幫你節省咗做功課嘅時間。
斯巴魯傲豹喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 260,000 - 280,000，一共有 2 個版本，包括 2025 2.4T R-Touring EyeSight（RM 310,340）、2025 2.5L Touring EyeSight（RM 280,340）等。
梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 258,888 - 295,888，一共有 1 個版本，包括 Standard（RM 258,888）等。
由價錢嚟睇，梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 嘅起步價比斯巴魯傲豹平咗 RM 1,112。老實講，喺呢個價位段，幾千蚊嘅差距其實唔算大，關鍵仲係睇整體嘅性價比同長期使用成本。
斯巴魯傲豹搭載 2.0L Turbo，馬力 220 hp。官方油耗 9.5 L/100km。
梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 搭載 2.0L Turbo，馬力 220 hp。官方油耗 9.5 L/100km。
兩款車用咗同一套動力系統，日常開起嚟嘅感覺基本冇咩分別。油耗方面都差不多，唔使太糾結呢一點。
斯巴魯傲豹嘅安全評級係 TBD，主動安全系統包括 Basic。
梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 嘅安全評級係 5★ (Euro NCAP)，主動安全系統包括高級 ADAS。
安全配備方面，兩款車都拿到唔錯嘅評級。不過斯巴魯傲豹嘅 Basic 同梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 嘅高級 ADAS 喺功能上有啲差異，如果你比較看重主動安全嘅話，可以仔細對比下兩者嘅功能列表。
斯巴魯傲豹保養保修 3 年/100,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 保養保修 3 年/100,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
兩款車嘅保養保修條件一樣，呢方面唔使糾結。實際保養成本仲要睇品牌嘅服務網絡同零件價格，建議去車友群問吓真實車主嘅經驗。
總括嚟講，斯巴魯傲豹同梅賽德斯 - 賓士 GLA 都係馬來西亞市場好唔錯嘅車款。揀邊一輛，關鍵仲係要睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花啲時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅汽車市場，好多買家喺揀車嗰陣都會拎 Perodua Aruz 同 MG MG HS 嚟作比較。今日我哋由多個方面做一個詳細嘅比較，幫你省下做功課嘅時間。
Perodua Aruz 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 72,900 - 77,900，一共有 2 個版本，包括 1.5L X（RM 72,900）、1.5L AV（RM 77,900） 等。
MG MG HS 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 130,450 - 146,450，一共有 2 個版本，包括 1.5L Standard（RM 105,000）、1.5L Executive（RM 115,000） 等。
由價錢嚟睇，Perodua Aruz 嘅起步價確實比 MG MG HS 平咗 RM 57,550。如果你預算有限，Perodua 嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需求。但都要注意，平嗰幾千蚊，可能喺配備上會有取舍，具體要看你嘅需求。
Perodua Aruz 車身長 4400 mm，尾箱 400 L。
MG MG HS 車身長 4400 mm，尾箱 400 L。
兩款車嘅尺寸幾乎一樣，車內空間分別唔大。呢個級別嘅車，日常使用完全足夠。
Perodua Aruz 保養 5 年/150,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
MG MG HS 保養 7 年/150,000km，保養間隔 每 10,000km 或 6 個月。
Perodua Aruz 同 MG MG HS 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更睇重品牌口碑同二手價，可以優先考慮口碑好嗰款；如果你更在意性價比同配備，就揀配備更豐富嗰款。最後都係建議兩款都去試駕，親身體驗先係最重要嘅。
總體嚟講，Perodua Aruz 同 MG MG HS 都係馬來西亞市場幾唔錯嘅車型。揀邊款，關鍵都係睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，再去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
喺馬來西亞嘅汽車市場，好多買家喺揀車嗰陣都會拿馬自達 CX-3 同 Hyundai Tucson 做比較。今日我哋從多個層面做個詳細比較，幫到你節省咗做功課嘅時間。
馬自達 CX-3 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 126,159 - 139,159，總共 2 個版本，包括 2023 2.0L High（RM 139,159）、2023 2.0L Plus（RM 126,159）等。
現代 Tucson 喺馬來西亞嘅 OTR 售價係 RM 143,888 - 197,888，總共 5 個版本，包括 2025 HEV 1.6T AT 2WD Prestige（RM 197,888）、2025 1.6T DCT 4WD Prestige（RM 186,888）、2025 1.6T DCT 2WD Prime（RM 164,888）等。
從價錢嚟睇，馬自達 CX-3 嘅起步價確實比 Hyundai Tucson 平咗 RM 17,729。如果你預算有限，馬自達嘅入門版已經可以滿足日常需求。但都要留意，平嗰幾千蚊，喺配備上可能要有取捨，具體要睇你嘅需求。
馬自達 CX-3 車身長 4500 mm，尾箱 450 L。
現代 Tucson 車身長 4400 mm，尾箱 400 L。
空間方面，馬自達 CX-3 嘅車身比現代 Tucson 長咗 100 mm，車內乘坐空間會少少寬裕啲，特別係後座腳部空間。如果你經常載家人或者需要放嬰兒車，大少少嘅車身確實更加實用。
馬自達 CX-3 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
現代 Tucson 採用 FWD 驅動方式。
兩款車嘅驅動方式一樣，都係 FWD，日常駕駛感受唔會有太大分別。
馬自達 CX-3 同 Hyundai Tucson 都係馬來西亞市場嘅主流選擇，適合家庭使用、日常通勤。如果你更加看重品牌聲譽同二手價，可以優先考慮聲譽更好嗰一款；如果你更加在乎性價比同配備，嗰就揀配備更加豐富嗰款。最終都係建議兩款都去試駕，親身體驗先至係最重要。
總體嚟講，馬自達 CX-3 同 Hyundai Tucson 都係馬來西亞市場好好唔錯嘅車型。揀邊一部，關鍵仲要睇你嘅個人需求同預算。建議大家做好功課，多比較幾間車行嘅報價，先至去試駕做最終決定。買車係件大事，花少少時間做功課絕對唔會錯。
車款概覽
Audi A3 值唔值得買，關鍵唔係佢睇落幾吸引，而係佢有冇解決你真實用車需要。呢篇文章會把重點放喺油耗、加油次數同長期成本。
價格定喺 RM 340,112，買家可以率先用佢判斷預算壓力同同級定位。
購車價格指南
Audi A3 嘅買車預算可以從 RM 340,112 開始衡量。呢個數字真正影響嘅係月供、保險同現金流，而不止係展示廳入面嘅標示價。
如果你喺幾個版本之間猶豫，可以把 2025 2.0T S line（RM 340,112）放喺同一張清單入面比較。日常通勤買家優先睇舒適同安全，頻繁跑高速嘅買家則更加應重視動力、輔助駕駛同座艙方便。
核心參數總覽
睇 Audi A3 嘅核心規格，最重要係把數字翻譯成生活入面嘅感受。
渦輪增壓、4 缸嘅動力基礎，適合拿來判斷市區跟車同高速巡航有冇輕鬆。190 Ps、320 N·m 嘅輸出，真正意義喺滿載、爬坡同超車嗰陣唔會太吃力。6.2 L/100km 嘅油耗，對每日通勤嘅人會直接影響加油頻次。車長 4495 mm、車闊 1816 mm、車高 1425 mm、軸距 2636 mm，可以幫你預判泊車難度同後排乘坐空間。
優缺點分析
Audi A3 嘅優點唔使誇張，真正有價值嘅係佢有冇令日常使用更省心：預算清晰，方便同級車直接比較、日常能源成本有明確參考、動力輸出能支撐高速同超車需求。
需要留意嘅係，市區泊車同狹窄路段仍然要睇個人駕駛習慣。呢啲唔係扣分項，而係落訂前應該諗清楚嘅生活細節。
購車常見問題解答
購買 Audi A3 前，買家最常問嘅唔係單一規格，而係佢有冇融入自己嘅生活。
呢輛車適合邊個？適合把油耗、加油次數同長期成本放喺第一位嘅買家。家庭用戶要睇咩？優先睇後排乘坐、兒童座椅、行李同日常上下車有冇得手。每日開會唔會麻煩？6.2 L/100km 嘅油耗參考令通勤成本更容易預估。
競爭對手比較內容
把 Audi A3 放進同級車名單嗰陣，唔建議只看品牌或者外形。真正有用嘅比較次序係：先用 RM 340,112 鎖定預算範圍、再睇動力有冇足夠應付高速同滿載、接着比較能源成本同補能方便、最後睇空間有冇適合家人同行李。
咁樣篩選出來嘅結果更貼近日常生活。你會更清楚佢係適合城市通勤、家庭代步、長途巡航，定係更加適合做一輛講究個性嘅選擇。
用車全周期指南
擁有 Audi A3 嘅日常成本，最直接會反映喺燃油、保險、輪胎同定期保養上。6.2 L/100km 嘅油耗令通勤預算更容易掌握。
如果你頻繁跑南北大道，動力同座艙舒適度會比單純低價更重要；如果主要喺市區，泊車靈活性、視野同低速順滑度會更加影響心情。
兄弟姐妹們，今日講一個出海嘅大新聞——唔係賣車，係賣「司機」。6 月 2 號，文遠知行同 Uber 聯合宣佈咗一件事：計劃喺西班牙馬德里推出該國首個商業化 Robotaxi 試點服務。意思就係：西班牙人好快就可以用 Uber 叫到一台冇司機嘅出租車。呢次係文遠知行同 Uber 第一次一齊進入歐洲市場。馬德里亦成為文遠知行 Robotaxi 駛入嘅全球第十二個城市。
官方消息話，喺馬德里自治區政府嘅支持下，呢項服務今年內就會正式啟動。到嗰陣，馬德里嘅朋友哋打開 Uber App，就有一鍵呼叫文遠知行嘅 Robotaxi。同叫普通網約車一樣，分別係嚟嘅車冇駕駛員——至少喺初期，仲係有分別嘅。運營初期，車入面會配備經過專業培訓嘅安全員，終究係剛上線，穩妥第一。
文遠知行呢間公司，你可能聽過，也可能冇聽過。簡單介紹下：2017 年成立，一直埋頭搞 Robotaxi 技術研發同商業化。而家佢嘅 Robotaxi 已經覆蓋咗廣州、北京、新加坡、阿布達比、迪拜、利雅得、蘇黎世……加埋而家嘅馬德里，一共 12 個城市。西班牙亦係文遠知行進入嘅第五個歐洲市場——之前已經入咗瑞士、法國、比利時、斯洛伐克。按照文遠知行同 Uber 喺 2025 年 5 月達成嘅規劃，佢哋要喺五年內新增 15 個國際城市部署 Robotaxi 服務，全球部署數萬輛 Robotaxi。隨著馬德里落地，目前已經完成咗 4 個城市嘅佈局，仲有 11 個會喺 2030 年前陸續覆蓋。
講真嘅，中國自動駕駛公司出海唔係頭一回，但中國技術 + 全球出行平台 + 歐洲市場呢個組合，定係好有意思。馬德里係歐洲最具商業潛力嘅 Robotaxi 市場之一，人口多、出行需求大，當地政策都好友善。喺呢個市場站穩腳根，對文遠知行嚟講係個唔小嘅里程碑。對 Uber 嚟講，引進 Robotaxi 都係為咗降低成本——終究司機唔使發人工。對馬德里市民嚟講，以後打車可能更平。
Folks, today let's talk about big news on going global—not selling cars, but selling "drivers". On June 2, WeRide and Uber jointly announced a plan: to launch the country's first commercial Robotaxi pilot service in Madrid, Spain. In other words: Spanish residents will soon be able to hail a driverless taxi via Uber. This is the first time WeRide and Uber are partnering to enter the European market. Madrid also becomes the 12th city globally where WeRide's Robotaxi arrives.
According to official news, with the support of the Madrid regional government, this service will officially launch within this year. At that time, friends in Madrid can open the Uber App and call WeRide's Robotaxi with one click. It's just like calling an ordinary ride-hailing service, the difference is the arriving car has no driver—at least initially, there is still a difference. In the initial operation phase, a professionally trained safety monitor will be on board, as it's just launched, safety comes first.
This company, WeRide, you might have heard of it, or you might not. A brief introduction: Established in 2017, it has been dedicated to Robotaxi technology R&D and commercialization. Currently, its Robotaxis cover Guangzhou, Beijing, Singapore, Abu Dhabi, Dubai, Riyadh, Zurich... plus Madrid now, totaling 12 cities. Spain is also the 5th European market WeRide has entered—previously entered Switzerland, France, Belgium, Slovakia. According to the plan agreed by WeRide and Uber in May 2025, they plan to deploy Robotaxi services in 15 new international cities within five years, deploying tens of thousands of Robotaxis globally. With the Madrid launch, the deployment in 4 cities has been completed, and 11 more will be covered successively before 2030.
To be honest, it's not the first time Chinese autonomous driving companies are going global, but the combination of Chinese technology + global mobility platform + European market is quite interesting. Madrid is one of the European Robotaxi markets with the most commercial potential, with a large population, high travel demand, and friendly local policies. Being able to take root in this market is a significant milestone for WeRide. For Uber, introducing Robotaxis is also a way to reduce costs—after all, drivers don't need salaries. For Madrid residents, hailing a taxi might be cheaper in the future.
BYD officially released the May 2026 production and sales flash report, with new energy vehicles from all brands reaching a monthly sales volume of 383,453 vehicles, a slight increase of 0.26% year-on-year, achieving year-on-year positive growth in monthly sales after ten months; among them, passenger car deliveries reached 376,990 units, surging 19.4% month-on-month, wiping out the pain of previous model iterations, presenting a new pattern where the domestic base is stable, overseas sales are soaring, and high-end brands are scaling up across the board. Amidst the market environment of intensified competition in the domestic new energy sector, Tesla FSD entering China, and an intense launch of independent new products, it has forged a unique structural growth path.
The Dynasty and Ocean main brands combined sold 330,215 vehicles in May, accounting for over 80% of the group's total sales, remaining the stabilizer for BYD's sales volume. The full series had 8 models exceeding 20,000 units in monthly sales, covering products from 50,000 entry-level commuter to 200,000 home SUV.
Inside the Dynasty Network, the Yuan family sold 56,691 units, and the Song family 51,370 units. Both crossed the 50,000 threshold, becoming two major sales pillars for the brand, catering to home commuter and urban-rural travel needs; the Qin family followed closely with a stable performance of 28,360 units. The Han and Tang series maintained a volume in the six-thousand range, deeply cultivating the mid-to-large home sedan and SUV niche markets; the brand new model Xia is in the market cultivation phase, delivering 1,810 units monthly, with potential for steady volume growth as channels expand.
The Ocean Network's growth momentum is even more rapid, with 5 models entering the 20,000 club across the series: Sealion 42,615 units, Seal 34,117 units, Seagull 39,919 units, Dolphin 22,260 units, and Song PLUS 27,755 units. Among them, Seagull remains the best-selling entry-level commuter model thanks to its affordable pricing of 60,000-80,000. Sealion, as a new volume model, stands firm at the 40,000 level upon launch, filling the mid-size SUV product gap in the Ocean Network and perfecting the Ocean product tier layout. From commuter small cars to compact SUVs, the two main brands rely on DM-i hybrid and pure electric dual-line technologies to牢牢锁住 the mainstream home market share within 150,000 domestically.
Fang Cheng Bao Year-on-Year Surges 139.7%, Brand Upward Positioning Takes EffectThe high-end matrix of Denza, Fang Cheng Bao, and Yangwang sold a combined 46,489 vehicles in May, officially breaking away from the niche positioning to become a new pivot for BYD's brand premium and profit growth, breaking the industry curse of difficulty in high-end breakthrough for domestic brands.
The off-road brand Fang Cheng Bao sold 30,186 units monthly, surging 139.7% year-on-year, creating a new high in monthly sales since the brand launched. Its Titanium 7 model sold 18,280 units monthly, while Leopard 5 and Leopard 8 output remained stable, continuously squeezing the survival space for joint venture and imported models in the 250,000-400,000 hardcore off-road niche market.
Denza delivered 16,303 units in May, with the MPV benchmark D9 selling 6,721 units, and the Z9 series close to 6,000 units. MPV and mid-to-large sedan dual-line efforts helped them stand firm in the luxury new energy track; the million-level ultra-luxury brand Yangwang continued its steady climb, delivering 286 units that month, a year-on-year increase of 105.8%, completing market verification of the domestic brand ceiling product and forming a full price range product layout from 100,000+ home, 300,000-400,000 off-road, 500,000 luxury MPV to million-level flagship.
In May, BYD's overseas sales of passenger cars and pickup trucks reached 160,177 units, surging 80.7% year-on-year. Exports accounted for over 42% of the full series total sales, setting a new historical high for brand export and becoming the core driving force to stabilize May overall sales and achieve year-on-year positive growth.
Southeast Asia, Europe, and Latin America became the main incremental markets. Seagull, Song PLUS, and Yuan series continued to top new energy best-seller lists in multiple countries; the SHARK pickup truck exceeded 4,000 units in monthly exports for two consecutive months. Relying on the completion of localization production in Thailand, Brazil, Hungary, and Uzbekistan with four overseas vehicle factories, localized production continues to land, avoiding tariffs while rapidly penetrating terminal channels. Against the background of stock market competition in the domestic auto industry and normalized price wars, the rapidly expanding overseas market effectively counteracts sales volatility brought by domestic model iterations, officially upgrading from a supplementary market to BYD's core growth engine. As of now, BYD's global cumulative new energy vehicle sales have exceeded 16.5 million units, with the globalization map continuously broadening.
Intelligent Driving Empowers Product Iteration, H2 New Products Prepare to Surge VolumeMay marked a key node in BYD's intelligent driving landing, with the God's Eye intelligent driving system becoming a core bonus point for models: the number of vehicles with advanced intelligent driving across all brands exceeded 3.15 million, with daily road test data exceeding 200 million kilometers; that month, BYD implemented City Pilot and Smart Parking dual safety backup services, becoming the world's first auto manufacturer to achieve dual intelligent driving backups. Three days after policy implementation, the activation rate of models equipped with the God's Eye system in cities surged 50%. Intelligent driving experience upgrades directly drove in-store order conversion, solidifying product competitiveness for subsequent models to continue volume sales, and facing the intelligent driving market shock brought by FSD entering China.
From data details, BYD's cumulative sales from January to May 2026 were 1,405,039 units, down 20.32% year-on-year. The core reason is that the full series of main models were concentratedly iterated, and the capacity ramp-up of the 2nd Gen Fast Charge Blade Battery was restricted. The new Flash Charge Battery upgraded fast charging and low-temperature performance. Full series iteration models prioritized installing new batteries, but production line retrofitting dragged down capacity release. Order backlogs on popular models and delayed deliveries compressed the May delivery volume to a certain extent.
As the end of the second quarter approaches and the 2nd Gen Blade Battery capacity continues to release, coupled with new models such as Denza N8L, Fang Cheng Bao Titanium 7 Pure Electric Version, Sealion 05, and Xia L landing the market, the industry generally predicts that BYD's full brand sales in June are expected to exceed 400,000 vehicles. Relying on the four-dimension development logic of low-end volume locking share, high-end raising profit, overseas pushing volume, and intelligence improving product power, amidst the intensified new energy elimination round in the domestic market, BYD's full category layout advantage continues to amplify, securing its status as the domestic new energy leader, accelerating steadily towards global top auto manufacturers.
BYD officially released the May 2026 production and sales flash report, with new energy vehicles from all brands reaching a monthly sales volume of 383,453 vehicles, a slight increase of 0.26% year-on-year, achieving year-on-year positive growth in monthly sales after ten months; among them, passenger car deliveries reached 376,990 units, surging 19.4% month-on-month, wiping out the pain of previous model iterations, presenting a new pattern where the domestic base is stable, overseas sales are soaring, and high-end brands are scaling up across the board. Amidst the market environment of intensified competition in the domestic new energy sector, Tesla FSD entering China, and an intense launch of independent new products, it has forged a unique structural growth path.
The Dynasty and Ocean main brands combined sold 330,215 vehicles in May, accounting for over 80% of the group's total sales, remaining the stabilizer for BYD's sales volume. The full series had 8 models exceeding 20,000 units in monthly sales, covering products from 50,000 entry-level commuter to 200,000 home SUV.
Inside the Dynasty Network, the Yuan family sold 56,691 units, and the Song family 51,370 units. Both crossed the 50,000 threshold, becoming two major sales pillars for the brand, catering to home commuter and urban-rural travel needs; the Qin family followed closely with a stable performance of 28,360 units. The Han and Tang series maintained a volume in the six-thousand range, deeply cultivating the mid-to-large home sedan and SUV niche markets; the brand new model Xia is in the market cultivation phase, delivering 1,810 units monthly, with potential for steady volume growth as channels expand.
The Ocean Network's growth momentum is even more rapid, with 5 models entering the 20,000 club across the series: Sealion 42,615 units, Seal 34,117 units, Seagull 39,919 units, Dolphin 22,260 units, and Song PLUS 27,755 units. Among them, Seagull remains the best-selling entry-level commuter model thanks to its affordable pricing of 60,000-80,000. Sealion, as a new volume model, stands firm at the 40,000 level upon launch, filling the mid-size SUV product gap in the Ocean Network and perfecting the Ocean product tier layout. From commuter small cars to compact SUVs, the two main brands rely on DM-i hybrid and pure electric dual-line technologies to牢牢锁住 the mainstream home market share within 150,000 domestically.
Fang Cheng Bao Year-on-Year Surges 139.7%, Brand Upward Positioning Takes EffectThe high-end matrix of Denza, Fang Cheng Bao, and Yangwang sold a combined 46,489 vehicles in May, officially breaking away from the niche positioning to become a new pivot for BYD's brand premium and profit growth, breaking the industry curse of difficulty in high-end breakthrough for domestic brands.
The off-road brand Fang Cheng Bao sold 30,186 units monthly, surging 139.7% year-on-year, creating a new high in monthly sales since the brand launched. Its Titanium 7 model sold 18,280 units monthly, while Leopard 5 and Leopard 8 output remained stable, continuously squeezing the survival space for joint venture and imported models in the 250,000-400,000 hardcore off-road niche market.
Denza delivered 16,303 units in May, with the MPV benchmark D9 selling 6,721 units, and the Z9 series close to 6,000 units. MPV and mid-to-large sedan dual-line efforts helped them stand firm in the luxury new energy track; the million-level ultra-luxury brand Yangwang continued its steady climb, delivering 286 units that month, a year-on-year increase of 105.8%, completing market verification of the domestic brand ceiling product and forming a full price range product layout from 100,000+ home, 300,000-400,000 off-road, 500,000 luxury MPV to million-level flagship.
In May, BYD's overseas sales of passenger cars and pickup trucks reached 160,177 units, surging 80.7% year-on-year. Exports accounted for over 42% of the full series total sales, setting a new historical high for brand export and becoming the core driving force to stabilize May overall sales and achieve year-on-year positive growth.
Southeast Asia, Europe, and Latin America became the main incremental markets. Seagull, Song PLUS, and Yuan series continued to top new energy best-seller lists in multiple countries; the SHARK pickup truck exceeded 4,000 units in monthly exports for two consecutive months. Relying on the completion of localization production in Thailand, Brazil, Hungary, and Uzbekistan with four overseas vehicle factories, localized production continues to land, avoiding tariffs while rapidly penetrating terminal channels. Against the background of stock market competition in the domestic auto industry and normalized price wars, the rapidly expanding overseas market effectively counteracts sales volatility brought by domestic model iterations, officially upgrading from a supplementary market to BYD's core growth engine. As of now, BYD's global cumulative new energy vehicle sales have exceeded 16.5 million units, with the globalization map continuously broadening.
Intelligent Driving Empowers Product Iteration, H2 New Products Prepare to Surge VolumeMay marked a key node in BYD's intelligent driving landing, with the God's Eye intelligent driving system becoming a core bonus point for models: the number of vehicles with advanced intelligent driving across all brands exceeded 3.15 million, with daily road test data exceeding 200 million kilometers; that month, BYD implemented City Pilot and Smart Parking dual safety backup services, becoming the world's first auto manufacturer to achieve dual intelligent driving backups. Three days after policy implementation, the activation rate of models equipped with the God's Eye system in cities surged 50%. Intelligent driving experience upgrades directly drove in-store order conversion, solidifying product competitiveness for subsequent models to continue volume sales, and facing the intelligent driving market shock brought by FSD entering China.
From data details, BYD's cumulative sales from January to May 2026 were 1,405,039 units, down 20.32% year-on-year. The core reason is that the full series of main models were concentratedly iterated, and the capacity ramp-up of the 2nd Gen Fast Charge Blade Battery was restricted. The new Flash Charge Battery upgraded fast charging and low-temperature performance. Full series iteration models prioritized installing new batteries, but production line retrofitting dragged down capacity release. Order backlogs on popular models and delayed deliveries compressed the May delivery volume to a certain extent.
As the end of the second quarter approaches and the 2nd Gen Blade Battery capacity continues to release, coupled with new models such as Denza N8L, Fang Cheng Bao Titanium 7 Pure Electric Version, Sealion 05, and Xia L landing the market, the industry generally predicts that BYD's full brand sales in June are expected to exceed 400,000 vehicles. Relying on the four-dimension development logic of low-end volume locking share, high-end raising profit, overseas pushing volume, and intelligence improving product power, amidst the intensified new energy elimination round in the domestic market, BYD's full category layout advantage continues to amplify, securing its status as the domestic new energy leader, accelerating steadily towards global top auto manufacturers.
港交所網站掛出一咗一份熟悉嘅招股書。
5 月 28 日，繼去年 10 月首次遞表失效後，智能駕駛解決方案提供商蘇州天瞳威視電子科技股份有限公司（天瞳威視）再次向港股主板發起重衝，由匯豐及華泰國際聯席保薦。
喺智能駕駛賽道從「講故事」轉向「拼量產」嘅 2026 年，天瞳威視嘅二次遞表唔單止係一次資本試探，更係一場關於中國智駕供應商生存現狀嘅集中檢閱。
呢間被認為係「算力效率派」代表嘅公司，一邊連住從采埃孚到上汽、北汽嘅豪華產業資本陣營，一邊卻面臨住現金流緊繃、海外明顯回落嘅現實困境。喺呢場 IPO 嘅博弈中，光鮮同陣痛並存。
01
邊個係「天瞳威視」？
天瞳威視嘅創辦人王曦係一位典型嘅「回國」技術派。佢畢業於北京航空航天大學，後喺英國雷丁大學攻讀計算機科學博士學位。
喺決定創業之前，王曦曾經喺汽車零部件供應商天合汽車（TRW）及采埃孚擔任算法工程師同技術負責人，深度參與咗早期 ADAS 系統嘅開發。
2016 年，王曦捕捉到國內汽車智能化嘅風口，回國喺蘇州創立咗天瞳威視，定位係「以軟件算法驅動智能駕駛」嘅本土解決方案提供商。
公司嘅名字「天瞳」寓意「天之眼」，意在打造車輛感知萬物嘅視覺中樞。佢從最初嘅視覺感知算法起步，逐步擴展至行泊一體域控制器、L4 級自動駕駛系統等軟硬件結合嘅整體方案。
天瞳威視融資情況。資料來源：企查查
成立後不久，天瞳威視就獲得德聯資本、盛世投資嘅天使輪融資。此後十年時間，天瞳威視累計完成咗超過 10 輪融資，融資總額近 10 億元。
從招股書披露嘅股權結構嚟睇，天瞳威視構建咗深度綁定嘅「產業 + 資本」生態圈。
一方面，產業夥伴站台，全球汽車零部件巨頭采埃孚唔單止係其 C 輪領投方，亦係其戰略合作夥伴，持有天瞳威視 6.93% 嘅股份，位列第四大股東；國內方面，上汽集團通過上汽北美產投持股，北汽集團通過北汽產投佈局其中，地平線同商湯科技亦係戰略投資者。
另一方面，地方國資護航，唐山機器人基金、吳中金控等國資背景基金喺 D 輪及 D+ 輪入場，提供咗約 5.23 億元嘅資金支持。
截至最後實際可行日期股權架構
截至目前，王曦透過直接持股同員工持股平台合共控制公司約 40.84% 嘅權益，依然保持住對公司嘅控制權。
02
「兩條腿」行路
天瞳威視喺業務佈局上採取咗「雙軌並行」嘅策略。
喺 L2-L2+ 級輔助駕駛領域，天瞳威視嘅選擇非常務實。佢並冇盲目追逐算力堆疊嘅「軍備競賽」，而係走咗一條高性價比路線。
作為典型嘅視覺派智駕供應商，佢喺 L2 量產方案上以視覺感知為主，融合毫米波雷達同超聲波雷達，能夠喺較低算力平台上實現高級功能。例如，基於地平線 J6B 芯片（約 20TOPS）嘅方案即可支持行泊一體、高速 NOA。
呢種打法擊中咗 10 萬 -20 萬級主流車款對成本敏感嘅痛點。根據灼識諮詢嘅數據，按 2024 年裝機量計，天瞳威視係中國第二大同時提供行車同泊車解決方案嘅以軟件為核心嘅 L2-L2+ 級方案提供商，市場份額為 14.3%。
2024 年中國具備行泊一體能力嘅以軟件為核心供應商格局
截至最後實際可行日期，天瞳威視獲得 23 個汽車品牌嘅 198 款車款嘅 L2-L2+ 級解決方案定點函，並實現 6 個汽車品牌嘅 105 款車款嘅量產；獲得定點函嘅 198 款車款中有 87 款覆蓋海外市場，其中 59 款已實現量產。
但值得注意嘅係，L2-L2+ 市場正在經歷劇烈嘅「紅海化」。
一方面，經緯恆潤、福瑞泰克等本土 Tier1 正在加速追趕；另一方面，部分頭部車廠開始將低階智駕方案從外購轉為內部集成。
天瞳威視能否維持佢喺「性價比方案」領域嘅領先地位，取決於佢能否持續保持算法對低算力平台嘅優化能力，而這需要喺研發投入上持續加碼。
喺高級 L4 級自動駕駛領域，天瞳威視更多扮演「先鋒」角色。這亦係佢近兩年增長最快嘅板塊。
早在 2019 年，佢就參與咗上海洋山港嘅 5G 智能重卡項目。目前佢嘅 L4 方案覆蓋 Robobus、Robotaxi 同 Robotruck。其中，Robobus 係佢最具代表性嘅產品線，已喺蘇州、天津等城市嘅公開道路投入常態化試營運。
2025 年，天瞳威視從 L4 級解決方案產生收入 3.75 億元，佔公司總收入嘅 68% 以上，大部分收入來自 L4 級軟件解決方案。
然而，硬幣嘅另一面係商業化嘅曲折。雖然 L4 業務營收暴增，但佢嘅交付形態目前以「軟硬件一體解決方案」為主，呢種模式本質上接近「項目制交付」或「小規模車隊部署」，與 L2 業務中「純軟件授權 + 白盒交付」嘅高毛利、大規模複製邏輯存在顯著差異。
呢就直接導致 L4 業務毛利率嘅大幅波動：喺部分自研硬件佔比较高嘅項目中，毛利率一度低至 15%。
截至遞表日，公司雖手握超 10 億元嘅 L4 意向訂單，涵蓋 2500 架車，但呢啲訂單預計要喺未來三至五年內先會陸續交付，短期內對現金流嘅改善作用有限。
此外，天瞳威視仲有部分應收來自工程服務，主要涉及道路測試、數據收集支援及數據標註服務以及公司嘅專有工具鏈。
03
財務嘅雙面鏡
招股書嘅財務部分，展現咗智駕行業最真實嘅「B 面」：規模同虧損嘅極限拉扯，同埋賬面現金同營運消耗之間嘅緊張博弈。
營收高增長，但結構劇烈波動。
財務數據顯示，公司嘅營收呈現爆發式增長，從 2022 年嘅 1.72 億元增長至 2024 年嘅 4.83 億元，複合年增長率高達 67.7%。2025 年全年營收進一步增長至 5.5 億元。
但收入結構嘅變化明顯。2023 年，公司依賴 L2-L2+ 業務，佔比 90.2%；去到 2024 年，L4 業務佔比升至 50.2%；2025 年，L4 業務佔比進一步拉高至 68%。呢種「斷崖式」嘅結構切換，雖然證明佢 L4 技術搵到咗落地場景，但亦令市場質疑佢 L2 業務係咪已觸及天花板。
毛利率同純利潤嘅背離，呢係天瞳威視面臨嘅最大挑戰。
從毛利睇，整體毛利率喺 30% 左右徘徊，喺呢個技術密集型嘅智駕行業屬於中等水平。但細拆睇嚟，L2-L2+ 業務嘅毛利率通常能維持喺 40% 以上，純軟件授權模式，而 L4 業務嘅毛利率則因「軟硬件一體」交付中硬件佔比提高而被顯著拉低。
從純利潤睇，雖然表面虧損額較大，2024 年虧損 4.63 億、2025 年虧損約 2 億，呢度包含大量因優先股公平值變動帶來嘅「紙面虧損」。剔除呢個因素後嘅經調整純利潤更能反映公司嘅真實經營狀況：2024 年已收窄至 -438 萬元，但 2025 年並未如市場預期實現轉正，而係錄得約 -1086 萬元，虧損較 2024 年有所擴大。
呢個背後有一個不可回避嘅關鍵前提：調整後嘅「減虧」乃至「接近盈虧平衡」，係喺公司持續壓縮研發投入嘅基礎上實現嘅，研發費用從 2024 年嘅 1.17 億元降至 2025 年嘅 9231 萬元，研發費用率從 2024 年嘅 24.3% 進一步降至 16.8%，而 2022 年呢個數字曾高達 108.7%。對於一家科技公司嚟講，研發強度嘅「退坡」是否會影響未來嘅技術護城河，係一個潛在風險點。
現金流持續告急，最令人擔憂嘅信號。
根據最新招股書，截至 2025 年 12 月 31 日，公司賬上嘅現金及現金等价物為 2.35 億元，較 2025 年 6 月 30 日嘅 3.74 億元淨減少 1.39 億元，現金消耗速度較快。
更值得警惕嘅係經營現金流由正轉負且缺口持續擴大嘅趨勢。2023 年，公司經營活動現金流淨額為正向流入 1.15 億元，但 2024 年迅速轉為淨流出 1.89 億元，2025 年進一步惡化至淨流出 2.93 億元。
與此同時，應收賬款周轉急劇惡化。公司嘅貿易應收款項從 2023 年嘅 0.89 億元升至 2025 年嘅 5.48 億元，三年增長超過五倍，而同期營收增幅僅約 2.7 倍。
更令人擔憂嘅係應收款項周轉天數從 2023 年嘅 191 天同 2024 年嘅 166 天，到 2025 年驟升至 300 天，意味著公司從完成交付到收回款項平均需要接近一年時間。呢相當於變相為客戶提供長期無息墊資，喺資金本就緊張嘅情況下進一步加劇咗流動性壓力。
此外，雖然天瞳威視係首家出海嘅中國智駕軟件供應商，但 2025 年佢嘅海外業務遭遇咗明顯回落。2023 年天瞳威視海外收入為 1.27 億元，佔總營收比重達到 62.2%；到 2025 年海外收入降至 1100 萬元，佔比僅 2.0%。
喺而家全球地緣政治複雜、部分國家對智能汽車數據監管趨嚴嘅背景下，為佢嘅全球化故事增添咗一絲不確定性。
04
結語
天瞳威視嘅二次闖關，係智能駕駛行業進入「淘汰賽」階段嘅一個縮影。
從好嘅方面睇，佢踩準咗 L2 性價比同 L4 場景化落地嘅雙重節奏，且經調整純利潤喺特定口徑下已接近盈虧平衡，呢啲都畀投資者提供咗「有亮點可講」嘅故事線。
但從風險嘅角度睇，情況遠比首次遞表時更為嚴峻。業務重心嘅急速漂移、L4 業務商業化初期嘅盈利磨難、研發投入嘅被動收縮，呢啲此前就已存在嘅問題並未緩解。
天瞳威視 L4 級智能巴士
而真正令此次 IPO 帶「求生」色彩嘅，係現金流數據嘅實質性惡化：2.35 億元嘅賬面現金，面對每年近 3 億元嘅经营性現金淨流出，安全邊際已不足一年。疊加 300 天嘅應收賬款周轉天數，意味著公司每交付一筆訂單，都要墊付近一年嘅資金成本。
換言之，天瞳威視正處喺一個危險嘅財務窗口期：賬上嘅錢僅夠維持唔足一年嘅正常運作，而 L4 業務嘅大規模交付同回款卻需要更長時間。喺呢個智駕資本熱潮退去、一級市場融資邊際收緊嘅時刻，公司已冇太多等待嘅餘地。
首次遞表失效後僅隔半年便再次衝擊港股，對天瞳威視而言，與其話係戰略選擇，唔如話係現金倒逼下嘅必然之舉。
