The accelerated evolution of a new round of technological revolution and industrial transformation has put forward new requirements for productivity. As a qualitative transition of traditional productivity, the new quality productivity meets the internal requirements of the current high-quality development and Chinese path to modernization. Theoretical research on the connotation characteristics and improvement paths of new quality productivity is gradually deepening, but empirical research is still insufficient. Major national strategic regions are the leading areas for China's economic construction and development of new quality productivity. Accurate analysis of the current situation and regional differences in the development of new quality productivity in major national strategic regions is a prerequisite for China to adapt to local conditions, achieve coordinated, staggered, and linked development of new quality productivity. It is of great practical significance for China to accelerate the coordinated development of new quality productivity. By sorting out the connotation and characteristics of new quality productivity, a new quality productivity evaluation index system covering three dimensions of new industries, new models, and new kinetic energy is constructed. Based on this, the entropy TOPSIS method is used to measure the level of new quality productivity in major national strategic regions from 2012 to 2021, explore its spatiotemporal evolution characteristics, further analyze the development differences and sources of new quality productivity using Gini coefficient, and display and explore the growth differences of new kinetic energy, new industries, and new models in different regions. Research has found that: 1) the level of new quality productivity in major national strategic regions continues to improve, from high to low, followed by Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao, the Yangtze River Delta, Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei, the Yangtze River Economic Belt, and the Yellow River Basin. In terms of annual growth rate, the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region has relatively lagged behind. 2) The spatial distribution of new quality productivity in major national strategic regions is uneven, with a stepped feature. The first tier is centered around developed regions such as Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao, Beijing, and the Yangtze River Delta, with a significant lead in new quality productivity. The second tier includes Tianjin, some provinces in the Yangtze River Economic Belt, and the Yellow River Basin. The third and fourth tiers cover other regions, and the level of new quality productivity needs to be further improved. 3) There are significant differences in the development of new quality productivity within major national strategic zones, with the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region showing the most prominent internal differences, while the internal differences within the Yellow River Basin are gradually expanding. 4) In terms of new driving forces and industries, the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao and the Yangtze River Delta regions are overall leading. The levels of various dimensions in the Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei region are relatively high, but the growth rate is relatively slow. In contrast, the Yangtze River Economic Belt and the Yellow River Basin have seen faster growth in new models. Finally, policy recommendations are proposed to leverage local advantages, improve the scientific and technological innovation system, and promote regional coordinated development.