Objective: The paper aims to observe the development of China’s General Practitioners (GP) human resource and its gap with government’s 2020 policy goals. Methods: Using national and provincial data from China health statistics yearbook to calculate the number of GPs per 10000 residents and basic medical institution, GPs’ registration rate and the constituent ratios. Pearson correlation coefficient was used to measure the relationship between GPs allocation and related factors. Results (1) Compared to 2012, the total number of trained GPs in 2015 had an increase of 71.8%, while the registration rate of trained GPs had been below 40%, . (2) The number of trained GPs and registered GPs per 10000 residents were 1.37 and 0.50. The gap between east and middle-west areas is 1.7 times, and that between highest and lowest-allocated provinces was 7.8 times. The registration rate of GPs in highest province was 3.9 times of that in the lowest. (3) 83.4 % of trained GPs were in basic medical institutions, the average number of trained GPs per rural and urban basic institution was 2.14 and 2.17 in 2015. (4) In 2015, the number of trained GPs was positively correlated with the proportion of urban residents, per capita GDP and medical technical personnel in basic institution per 10000 Persons (r=0.64，0.69，0.60，all P＜ 0.01). The registration rate of GPs was positively correlated with the government health input per capita （r=0.55，P＜0.01）. (5). There was a huge gap of 107422～229528 between present trained GPs and the 2020 goal of government’s plan. According the low level of the plan, 11 provinces had a 5000 above gap of trained GPs, while 19 provinces did according the high level of the plan. Those undeveloped areas in the country must struggle to cope with the challenge of less trained GPs, lower registration rate and outflow of trained GPs to developed areas. Conclusion：The development of China’s GPs human resource is confronted with lack of trained GPs, uneven distribution of human resource across the country and low registration rate, which demonstrates the tardy transformation of medical production, lack of incentive for GPs, and the poor attractiveness of GPs’ profession. More practical and powerful incentives are vital to keep and attract top talent into GPs.