It has been just over a week since Chinese New Year 2026 and the impact of this year’s robotic display still lingers in my mind.

For those who have not already seen it, the performances stole the CNY limelight, featuring humanoid robots executing jaw-dropping feats such as somersaults and nunchaku routines—blending traditional culture with cutting-edge robotics and AI technology.

I could not help but imagine that if these robots were dressed in full traditional attire and masks, I would be hard-pressed to distinguish them from human performers.

These viral displays highlight China’s growing dominance in robotics, from AI-driven humanoids to industrial robots, signalling a significant leap in automation that is  reshaping industries worldwide.

The tech enthusiast in me—as I’m sure many of you can relate—began wondering about the engineering and infrastructure puzzle pieces that made this possible.

What Powered the CNY 2026 Robot Performance?

Infrastructure Considerations

  • Physical Hardware – The cost-effective materials and scalable mass production capabilities required to design robots capable of such performance suggest clear pathways toward real-world consumer and industrial applications.
  • Compute Power: CPUs, GPUs, and AI Acceleration- Deploying these robots require edge computing hubs, high performance processors, AI accelerators, and potentially cloud-based large language models (LLM) integration. This enables real-time vision processing, path planning, environmental perception, and precise motion control, allowing the robots to perform complex and dynamic movements with high synchronization accuracy
  • Network Infrastructure – The underlying high-speed backbone network facilitates real-time command, control, and data-transmission—essential for large-scale synchronized robotic choreography. Localized 5G-A networks likely played a key role in minimizing latency and enhancing responsiveness
  • Digital Platforms – Software platforms enable seamless integration, centralized control, developer customization, and system scalability, allowing robotic systems to be adapted across multiple industries and use cases.

Sovereignty Considerations

Balancing rapid high-tech adoption requires data localisation policies, cybersecurity safeguards, and protection of critical infrastructure components to ensure operational resilience and national autonomy.

Who Built the Robots Behind the CNY 2026 Show?

The company behind the spectacle is Chinese robotics startup Unitree Robotics, founded in 2016. Unitree has often been compared to Boston Dynamics, but with a significantly more affordable pricing model—much like Deepseek’s positioning relative to ChatGPT.

For example, Unitree’s R1 robot starts at approximately USD 5,000, utilizing cost effective hardware while supporting modular LLMs that allow developers greater customization and experimentation.

In addition, the system platform is open-source, enabling distributed training, custom model development, and seamless deployment with support for major open-source frameworks. In 2025, the company announced that users could further customise and control robots via a mobile application. In a world where most individuals own at least one smart device, the primary limitation becomes creativity rather than accessibility.

What Hardware Do These Robots Run On?

The robots run on high-performance computing module featuring 8-core CPU and integrated GPU. Newer models offer integration with NVIDIA Jetson Orin models, delivering AI performance up to 275 TOPS (trillions of operations per second).

For Terminator fans, it may be reassuring to know that—at least for now—battery limitations mean these robots operate for 1-2 hours before requiring charging.

Note: The G1 robots featured in the CNY show are more advanced models and may have enhanced performance specifications.

How Were the Robots Coordinated?

The robots relied on cluster-performance technology, enabling synchronized group movement. Onboard sensors provided real-time environmental perception, supported by localised 5G-A networks. However, while the robots were physically autonomous in movement, they were largely pre-programmed and choreographed for the specific event rather than operating with full independent agency.

Implications for Infrastructure and Sovereignty: Infrastructure Control & Autonomy

The shift to software-defined, centralized robotics platforms means that manufacturing, logistics, and operational infrastructure increasingly depends on digital orchestration layers and ecosystem partnerships. Whoever governs these platforms–whether vendors, hyperscalers, or local integrators–can significantly influence operational autonomy, resilience, and long-term competitiveness.

Regional adoption of integrated execution platforms—particularly in Asia Pacific’s push for industrial embodied AI–signals a move toward locally governed infrastructure ecosystems, reducing dependency on foreign technology stacks. In Asia/Pacific, local partnerships are becoming essential to accelerating innovation while protecting data sovereignty and regulatory compliance.

Final Reflections

Reflecting on China’s CNY 2026 robotic spectacle, I was struck not only by the technical brilliance and seamless choreography, but by how it exemplifies the convergence of affordable, high-performance robotics infrastructure and strategic technological self-reliance. The future of automation is not just about building smarter robots—it is about who controls the orchestration layers, data flow, compute infrastructure, and platform ecosystems behind them.

What’s your take on balancing innovation and digital independence?

Interested to learn more? Talk to us.

Franco Chiam - Vice President - IDC

Franco Chiam is the vice president for IDC's Asia/Pacific (excluding Japan) Cloud, Datacenter, Telecommunication, and Infrastructure Research Group. He manages and shapes the above domains' offerings to IDC clients, which include cloud and infrastructure surveys, market analysis and perspective, speaking engagements, and executive briefings. In the ever-evolving landscape of technologies, the pillars of cloud computing, datacenters, and telecommunication have emerged as the driving forces behind our interconnected world. As these domains continue to shape the future of infrastructure, their integration and advancement play a crucial role for the foreseeable future.

Manufacturers across Asia/Pacific are navigating powerful crosscurrents: cost pressure, supply chain volatility, skills gaps, and intensifying competition. At the same time, AI is shifting from isolated pilots to systems that can plan, decide, and act. Agentic AI is moving from experimental tooling to bounded operational use cases. The shift is real, but uneven, and it will reward manufacturers that already have disciplined data, process ownership, and governance.

IDC’s FutureScape Worldwide Manufacturing 2026 Predictions for Asia/Pacific (excluding Japan) are more than forecasts. They are a planning input and a view of where investment and capability-building are likely to concentrate. Use them to pressure-test priorities and readiness, not as a certainty about what will happen or when. In the context of agentic AI, they help answer the question for leaders on whether agentic AI will matter, and how quickly they can translate these signals into measurable operating outcomes (eg. disruption recovery, cycle time, quality, OT risk).

What is Agentic AI in Manufacturing?

Agentic AI in manufacturing goes beyond analytics and copilots. It introduces AI agents that can sense conditions, evaluate options, and autonomously execute and orchestrate workflows across the organization, including planning, production, quality, engineering, IT, and cybersecurity, within defined guardrails. Humans remain accountable for strategy, oversight, and exception handling.

Most manufacturers in Asia/Pacific are not starting from this end state. As the differentiated use cases in the above IDC framework illustrate, many organizations remain concentrated in early stages:

  • Generic productivity use cases, providing task-level assistance such as document summarization or reporting.
  • Early functional or process-specific use cases where AI provides decision support within a single function but remains human-driven.

These capabilities are increasingly table stakes. They improve efficiency, but do not yet differentiate manufacturers or fundamentally change how factories, supply chains, or engineering organizations operate.

For manufacturers, the real value lies further up the curve, adopting advanced functional and industry-specific use cases, where AI agents are deeply integrated with operational data, engineering systems, and execution platforms. This is where AI begins to autonomously coordinate decisions across functions, close the loop between design and operations, and where value becomes measurable with fewer schedule resets, faster recovery, reduced security detection time, and fewer late-stage design remedies.

The following three predictions should be read through this lens. Each one highlights a step away from generic productivity toward higher-order, manufacturing-specific agentic capabilities.

Autonomous Production Scheduling

IDC Prediction: By 2027, over 40% of manufacturers with a production scheduling system in place will upgrade it with AI-driven capabilities to start enabling autonomous processes.

Autonomous production scheduling is the most pragmatic entry point into agentic AI for manufacturers because it sits at the intersection of demand, capacity, assets, labor, and supply. Most Asia/Pacific manufacturers already operate advanced planning and scheduling (APS) tools, but these systems are typically static, rule-based, and highly dependent on human planners to intervene when conditions change.

Agentic scheduling represents a step change. AI agents continuously ingest live signals from manufacturing execution systems (MES), maintenance systems, supplier updates, logistics data, and demand forecasts. They evaluate trade-offs in near real time, simulate multiple scenarios, and rebalance production plans dynamically. Over time, these agents do not just recommend changes, they begin to execute them autonomously within predefined constraints, escalating only when exceptions exceed risk thresholds.

This moves manufacturers beyond functional decision support into advanced functional autonomy. Planning is no longer a periodic activity; it becomes a continuously orchestrated process that coordinates decisions across production, maintenance, and supply chain functions.

What to do now:

  • Start where volatility is highest: a constrained line, plant, or product family with frequent schedule disruption.
  • Connect real-time shop floor, asset health, and supply signals directly into the scheduling layer.
  • Establish human-on-the-loop governance early, then expand agent decision rights as performance, trust, and accountability mature.

Predictive Industrial Data Security

IDC Prediction: To counter data model poisoning risks, 70% of large manufacturers will use AI-enabled OT cyberdefense by 2029, autonomously flagging low-level threats and cutting detection times by 60%.

As manufacturers scale advanced agentic AI use cases, cybersecurity becomes a foundational requirement, not a supporting function. Agentic AI systems depend on trusted data, models, and execution environments. If those inputs are compromised, autonomy magnifies risk at machine speed.

AI-enabled OT cybersecurity introduces agents that continuously monitor behavior across networks, devices, control systems, and AI models themselves. Instead of relying on signature-based detection, these agents identify subtle anomalies such as data poisoning, abnormal control logic, or coordinated low-level intrusions that traditional tools and human operators often miss.

For Asia/Pacific manufacturers operating complex brownfield environments, this capability is essential to safely scaling autonomy. Without it, organizations will be forced to cap agent decision authority, limiting the very value agentic AI is meant to unlock.

What to do now:

  • Map critical OT assets, data streams, and AI models that feed systems and agentic workflows.
  • Deploy AI-driven anomaly detection alongside existing SOC and OT security tooling, not as a replacement.
  • Define clear escalation and containment rules that balance autonomy with human accountability.

Agentic Product & Process Simulation

IDC Prediction: By 2028, 50% of A1000 manufacturers will use AI agents in conjunction with design and simulation tools to continuously validate design changes and configurations or variants against product requirements.

Continuous design validation is where agentic AI clearly enters the industry-specific tier. Today, engineering, simulation, manufacturing, and quality operate in loosely coupled stages with design validation occurring episodically, often disconnected from real-world production feedback, and issues surfacing late through defects, rework, or warranty issues.

Agentic AI changes this by embedding validation agents directly into the digital thread. These agents continuously test design changes against requirements, manufacturability constraints, historical defect data, and live production feedback. As materials, suppliers, processes, or operating conditions change, validation updates automatically, closing the loop between design intent and operational reality.

For manufacturers with high product complexity, configuration variability, or rapid innovation cycles, this capability transforms how risk, quality, and cost are managed. It shifts validation from a checkpoint activity to an always-on assurance mechanism.

What to do now:

  • Integrate PLM, simulation, quality, and manufacturing data into a shared, persistent validation workflow.
  • Use agents to automatically assess the downstream impact of engineering changes before release.
  • Move from milestone-based validation reviews to continuous, agent-driven validation embedded in daily operations.

Turning Predictions into Action

These predictions highlight a common truth: agentic AI is not a single technology investment. It is an operating model shift. Manufacturers that succeed will align four foundations:

  1. Strategy: Clear ownership of where autonomy creates value, where human judgment must remain in the loop, and how decision rights evolve over time as agents mature.
  2. Workforce: New roles focused on supervising, governing, training, and continuously improving AI agents, not just consuming AI outputs. This includes redefining accountability as work shifts from people executing tasks to people overseeing autonomous systems.
  3. Technology: Modernized data, security, and cloud foundations designed for continuous orchestration, resilience, and trust spanning IT and OT environments.
  4. Measurement: A clear baseline of current maturity and performance, with success defined not by one-time deployments but by metrics tied to targeted outcomes, such as reduced disruption, faster cycle times, improved quality, or increased autonomous decision coverage.

For Asia/Pacific manufacturers, near-term advantage will come from moving a few bounded workflows into governed production use. Leaders who default to a “wait for certainty” strategy, delaying action until technologies, standards, or competitors fully converge, risk locking themselves into lower positions on the agentic maturity curve and find themselves under increased competitive pressure. Those who treat these predictions as navigational beacons, not distant forecasts, will build factories that are more resilient, adaptive, and competitive.

Agentic AI will not replace manufacturing excellence. It will amplify it.

FAQs on Agentic AI in Manufacturing

  1. What real business problems does agentic AI actually solve in factories and supply chains?

Agentic AI excels in volatile and constraint-heavy operations with frequent disruptions, competing priorities, and too many variables for humans to continuously rebalance. In practice, it helps manufacturers shorten disruption recovery time, reduce manual coordination, and ensure more decisions follow defined guardrails. Examples include autonomous production scheduling, predictive maintenance, quality inspection and predictive quality, AI-enabled OT cyberdefense, and digital twins / simulation-driven design and operations.

  1. Where is the ROI—quality, throughput, inventory, OEE, labor, or something else?

ROI usually shows up first as reduced disruption cost (fewer expediting cycles, fewer schedule resets, less unplanned downtime) and then as improvements in throughput and service levels once planning and execution tighten.

  1. Is agentic AI really different from traditional automation, RPA, or rules-based systems?

Yes, the difference is adaptive decisioning across systems, notjust automation. Rules-based automation executes what you already know; agentic AI can evaluate trade-offs under changing conditions, run scenario logic, and act within constraints, then escalate exceptions when risk thresholds are exceeded.

  1. What data and integration requirements matter most?

Agentic AI depends on trusted signals and tight integration across planning, shopfloor execution, asset health, and supply inputs, otherwise it just automates bad decisions faster. Prioritize master/asset data quality, event-level timestamps, and clearly governed interfaces between IT and OT, with security controls that protect both data and models, and assign data owners to ensure continued data quality assurance.

  1. What workforce impacts and change management issues should be expected?

Expect work to shift from “doing the task” to supervising decision quality: defining guardrails, monitoring exceptions, tuning agents, and clarifying accountability when outcomes are wrong. The hard part is decision rights, escalation paths, and aligning planners/engineers/IT/OT/security around a shared operating model, and this will involve changed responsibility and job design.

Register now for the live webinar on 24 February 2025 at 1:30 pm SGT to join IDC in charting the agentic future with confidence

Stephanie Krishnan - Associate Vice President, Manufacturing and Energy Insights Programs - IDC

Stephanie Krishnan is an associate VP responsible for producing, developing, and growing the IDC Manufacturing and Energy Insights programs in Asia/Pacific. Within Manufacturing Insights, Stephanie conducts supply chain and Industry 4.0 research that supports clients with global sourcing (profitable proximity and sustainable outcomes), transportation, logistics, warehousing, and more. In addition, her contributions to subscription products and custom research span ecosystems, value chains, and the supply chains of industrial industries. In this role, she delivers a research agenda that supports technology buyers in their strategies and buying decisions as well as vendors in terms of market trends and intelligence.

一个正在被低估的变化已经不只是算力池

过去十多年,云计算的核心价值在于弹性、规模和成本效率。但 IDC 指出,随着生成式 AI 和智能体(Agentic AI)走向生产环境,云计算正在发生一次根本性转变——它不再只是承载应用的基础设施,而正在演进为 AI 运行、治理与协同的核心平台

在中国市场,这一变化尤为明显。一方面,AI 应用对算力、数据、网络和安全提出了更复杂、更高频的需求;另一方面,数据安全、数字主权和成本压力,使企业无法简单依赖单一公有云模式。云计算,正在被迫“进化”。

在《IDC FutureScape:全球云计算2026年预测——中国启示》(Doc# ,2026年,1月)中,IDC 系统性地刻画了未来五年云计算将如何围绕 AI 重构自身形态与价值。

十大预测:AI 如何重新定义云计算的形态与边界(原文引用)

预测 1|云基础架构现代化

2027 年,海量的计算和数据需求将强制超过 85% 的中国组织将传统云环境转型适配 AI 工作负载的新型平台。

这意味着,传统以 IaaS/PaaS 为中心的云架构已难以支撑 AI 应用规模化,云基础架构现代化将成为企业发展智能业务的前提条件。

预测 2|代理式 AI 云运营

2027 年,80% 的中国 500 强企业将会部署代理式 AI 平台,为自动化 IT 云运营提供大规模、持续性的监控、分析、故障修复能力,最小化人工干预。

云运维正从“人驱动”走向“智能体驱动”,IT 团队的角色将随之发生转变。

预测 3|专业的 AI 云服务提供商

2029 年,区别于 GPU 资源提供商,至少 30% 的高等级 GPU 将由 AI 云服务商的具备云特性、灵活计费、API、软件服务的资源覆盖。

企业将越来越倾向于选择“懂 AI 的云”,而不仅仅是提供算力的云。

预测 4|边缘 AI 智能体

2028 年,具身智能将迎来爆发式增长,云服务提供商将通过在企业边缘环境部署 AI 基础设施和智能体支撑其中 60% 的业务场景。

AI 正从中心云走向边缘,云计算的服务边界被显著拉长。

预测 5|基于私有云的企业级 AI 平台

2028 年,为了满足数据隐私需求以及降低公共大语言模型的数据泄露风险,60% 的中国组织将采用能够在数据治理方面提供更多控制能力的私有云平台方案。

私有云正在成为企业级 AI 的关键承载平台,而非“过渡选择”。

预测 6AI 成本治理

2028 年,没有把 AI 投入并入成本治理范围的企业 FinOps 团队将在 AI 相关项目方面面临 30% 的成本增长以及更低的总体回报。

AI 时代,成本治理能力将直接影响云与 AI 投资的可持续性。

预测 7|异构云基础设施

2028 年,超过 80% 的中国组织将采用异构云基础设施,用于平衡混合的 CPUGPU、存储技术以优化 AI 工作负载的性价比。

单一算力形态已无法满足 AI 需求,异构成为常态。

预测 8|云端风险管理

2029 年,基于地缘政治的不确定性,50% 的实施数字化自治的中国组织将迁移敏感的工作负载到新的云平台以降低风险和提高自主能力。

云计算正在被纳入更宏观的风险与主权考量。

预测 9AI 辅助工作负载替代

2029 年,60% 的中国组织将采用云端的 AI 融合工具用于评估成本和性能指标,通过部署 25% AI 智能体自动化工作负载的协同,以优化工作负载的替代。

AI 将参与云资源与工作负载的“自我优化”。

预测 10|智能体 SaaS 平台

2029 年,50% 的中国企业应用将采用 SaaS 平台模式进行实时工作流中的预定义 APP 功能和 AI 智能体的协同,构建模块化和共享交互的解决方案。

SaaS 正在向“应用 + 智能体”的平台形态演进。

这些预测共同说明了什么?

IDC FutureScape 2026 反复传递出一个清晰信号:AI 已经成为云计算发展的第一驱动力。

云不再只是支撑 IT,而是直接决定 AI 能否落地、能否规模化、能否在合规和成本可控的前提下持续运行。忽视云基础架构演进的企业,将很难在 AI 投资上获得长期回报。

分析师观点

IDC 中国高级研究经理张犁认为,中国云计算市场正从“规模增长期”迈入“能力重构期”。FutureScape 2026 显示,云计算正在围绕 AI 重塑自身的架构、服务形态与商业模式——从基础架构现代化、代理式 AI 运维,到私有云与异构云并行发展。那些能够将云战略与 AI 战略深度融合的企业,更有可能在复杂环境中实现业务韧性与持续创新;而仍将云视为单一基础设施选项的组织,将面临更高的成本、风险与转型阻力。

一个面向管理层的综合建议

IDC 并不建议企业孤立地“上云”或“上 AI”。更重要的是, AI 为核心,重新审视云基础架构、云运营模式、成本治理与风险管理能力
云计算,已经从“是否采用”的问题,转变为“是否足以支撑下一代智能业务”的问题。

如需进一步了解与研究相关内容或咨询 IDC其他相关研究,请点击此处与我们联系。

Lee Zhang - Senior Research Manager - IDC

Lee Zhang is a senior research manager for IDC Cloud Computing whose research theme focuses on cloud technology, namely hybrid cloud infrastructure, cloud-native infrastructure, big data infrastructure, microservice architecture, and deep learning (DL)/machine learning (ML) architecture, among others. Lee is also responsible for providing project consulting, market analysis for cloud service providers and end users, in collaboration with IDC local and regional consulting/research teams. Lee previously worked as a solution architect for Alibaba Cloud in the retail business, primarily focused on hybrid cloud solution design and delivery, and digital transformation project management. He assisted all types of clients, such as private enterprises, state enterprises, and government departments, designing digital transformation solutions with cloud technology such as hybrid cloud infrastructure including infrastructure as a service (IaaS)/platform as a service (PaaS)/desktop as a service (DaaS)/software as a service (SaaS), middle-stage infrastructure, big data platform, migration to cloud methodology, microservice architecture, and DL/ML, to name a few. Lee graduated from Beijing Institute of Technology with a master's degree in Business Administration (MBA). He obtained his bachelor's degree in Automation from the Huazhong University of Science and Technology.