The clue is in the term ‘State Capitalism’ with the State being the dominant force and profit not being the sole driving factor. Socialism is defined as the state controlling production, distribution and exchange for the benefit of the community as a whole. Replace ‘community’ with ‘State’ and you get China which has adapted that model and also ‘weaponised’ big state companies ie Telecoms with its footprint in Africa and elsewhere. See also the current debate raging over the security implications of Huawei which is a private company but also an arm of the State.
So how much of China is Socialism and how much is capitalism? It’s not a free market economy and its version of ‘capitalism’ is regarded as distorting the playing field as many private firms are propped up by the State for strategic reasons. Capitalism and Socialism come in different forms and are influenced as much by the political stability and culture of the country concerned. Venezuela is an example of this. Kansas in the US tried and failed with its pure capitalism model by reducing all taxes and relying on business growth to fuel its budget. It failed. Do we then rubbish capitalism as a model for evermore? No. Same with socialism. You can adapt it, use it, as you can with a capitalism model and produce a system that works or is a hybrid of both which in reality is what the U.K. and most countries are.