CWWK i5-1235U 6 port i226 report

Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.

kboxvegas

New Member
Feb 12, 2016
19
8
3
I got one on order from CWWK, thanks for all the work involved here! Looking to run Pfsense, OPNsense, HomeAssistant, and Frigate using a usb Coral and iris xe iGPU for detection of 6 indoor camera's assisted by mmave based multi sensors for intelligent automation and security.
 

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
I got one on order from CWWK, thanks for all the work involved here! Looking to run Pfsense, OPNsense, HomeAssistant, and Frigate using a usb Coral and iris xe iGPU for detection of 6 indoor camera's assisted by mmave based multi sensors for intelligent automation and security.
Did you get the 1235U?
 

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
@fta Any idea where the C-states BIOS option is hidden in your HWP BIOS? I can't seem to find it. Using the HWP-enabled BIOS draws about 4.5W more than using the stock BIOS with C-states enabled.
 

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
@fta Any idea where the C-states BIOS option is hidden in your HWP BIOS? I can't seem to find it. Using the HWP-enabled BIOS draws about 4.5W more than using the stock BIOS with C-states enabled.
Strangely enough, the unlocked BIOS does not have the C-states question in it. However, C-states are enabled for me. What does cpupower say on yours? Mine is below. The CPU only supports C1/C1E, C6, C8, and C10. I have disabled C1E.

Bash:
root@pve:~# cpupower idle-info
CPUidle driver: intel_idle
CPUidle governor: menu
analyzing CPU 2:

Number of idle states: 5
Available idle states: POLL C1 C6 C8 C10
POLL:
Flags/Description: CPUIDLE CORE POLL IDLE
Latency: 0
Usage: 6382
Duration: 54570
C1:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x00
Latency: 1
Usage: 23874
Duration: 1721458
C6:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x20
Latency: 170
Usage: 536
Duration: 334958
C8:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x40
Latency: 200
Usage: 756
Duration: 645080
C10:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x60
Latency: 230
Usage: 4329
Duration: 13303478
 

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
Strangely enough, the unlocked BIOS does not have the C-states question in it. However, C-states are enabled for me. What does cpupower say on yours? Mine is below. The CPU only supports C1/C1E, C6, C8, and C10. I have disabled C1E.

Bash:
root@pve:~# cpupower idle-info
CPUidle driver: intel_idle
CPUidle governor: menu
analyzing CPU 2:

Number of idle states: 5
Available idle states: POLL C1 C6 C8 C10
POLL:
Flags/Description: CPUIDLE CORE POLL IDLE
Latency: 0
Usage: 6382
Duration: 54570
C1:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x00
Latency: 1
Usage: 23874
Duration: 1721458
C6:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x20
Latency: 170
Usage: 536
Duration: 334958
C8:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x40
Latency: 200
Usage: 756
Duration: 645080
C10:
Flags/Description: MWAIT 0x60
Latency: 230
Usage: 4329
Duration: 13303478
How did you disable C1E? I'm trying to strike the right balance between idle power usage and latency.

So far, here is what I see:

Stock BIOS, C-states enabled:
12.8W idle average
Average ping (100 samples): 1.133ms

Stock BIOS, C-states disabled:
16W idle average
Average ping (100 samples): 0.682ms

HWP BIOS:
13.2W idle average
Average ping (100 samples): 1.09ms

HWP BIOS w/ >C1E disabled:
15.7W
Average ping (100 samples): 0.458ms

HWP w/ >C1E disabled seems to offer the best blend of responsiveness and idle power and comes the closest to bare metal pfsense which was 0.325ms average ping but 18W idle. This was accomplished via:
Code:
echo 1|tee /sys/devices/system/cpu/cpu*/cpuidle/state[234]/disable
There are other things I haven't tried yet such as playing with the "intel_idle.max_cstate" and "idle=halt" kernel command line parameters.

Something that doesn't make sense to me is that i7z and powertop both showed deep C6+ states being hit with the stock BIOS regardless of the C-states setting in BIOS but the toggle clearly affected responsiveness and power usage.
 

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
How did you disable C1E?
This CPU only supports C1 or C1E and defaults to C1E. To use C1 instead, add this to the kernel command line: intel_idle.preferred_cstates=2.

There might be something wrong with your ping test. The differences look way too high. For example, the latency difference I'm seeing between having C10 enabled and disabled is basically spot on with what cpupower idle-info reports as the expected latency, which is 230us. Note that if you disable the higher C-states, it will hurt your single core turbo since that relies on the power savings of the higher C-states.
 

roarking

New Member
Aug 28, 2022
18
25
3
Would you be so kind as to post photos of the "Main" and "Advanced" menus of this unlocked BIOS? I do not have a system for this BIOS yet but would like to understand the BIOS version and the list of "Advanced" menu items.
 

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
This CPU only supports C1 or C1E and defaults to C1E. To use C1 instead, add this to the kernel command line: intel_idle.preferred_cstates=2.

There might be something wrong with your ping test. The differences look way too high. For example, the latency difference I'm seeing between having C10 enabled and disabled is basically spot on with what cpupower idle-info reports as the expected latency, which is 230us. Note that if you disable the higher C-states, it will hurt your single core turbo since that relies on the power savings of the higher C-states.
I think the additional latency comes from the hypervisor scheduling, state of cache and TLBs, kernel locks, and various other factors - there's more to waking up from C10 than just the raw processor time of 230µs (1µs = 0.001ms, 230µs == 230ms). I'm roughly ~0.15ms off from bare metal at less power using your HWP BIOS + Proxmox + pfsense than if pfsense was installed directly onto the hardware, which is pretty good. I expect that my Proxmox + C-states + pfSense ping times should be repeatable by anyone with similar hardware. The times themselves are directly related to my network configuration (switches, cables, etc), but the deltas between C-states enabled/disabled should be real close unless there's something wrong with my hardware.

I can sacrifice the ultimate turbo speed since my rulesets are pretty simplistic and my ISP link is only gigabit. Downloading last night at 96MB/sec only pushed 16% CPU.
 

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
Would you be so kind as to post photos of the "Main" and "Advanced" menus of this unlocked BIOS? I do not have a system for this BIOS yet but would like to understand the BIOS version and the list of "Advanced" menu items.
The unlocked BIOS that @fta provided will blow your mind with all the options available. I consider myself pretty decent with PC hardware but there's stuff in there I've never heard of before. The unlock provides a lot of options that were not meant to be exposed to end users (and a lot of options that the end users really should have access to that the stock BIOS completely ignores). My preference is to use the unlocked HWP BIOS because it uses the intel_pstate driver with HWP active mode which is slightly faster at making determinations about processor state. fta's unlock is basically a huge gift to anyone running this hardware.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fway and rsadix

roarking

New Member
Aug 28, 2022
18
25
3
fta's unlock is basically a huge gift to anyone running this hardware.
Would you be so kind as to post photos of the "Main" and "Advanced" menus of this unlocked BIOS? I do not have a system for this BIOS yet but would like to understand the BIOS version and the list of "Advanced" menu items.
 

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
I think the additional latency comes from the hypervisor scheduling, state of cache and TLBs, kernel locks, and various other factors - there's more to waking up from C10 than just the raw processor time of 230µs (1µs = 0.001ms, 230µs == 230ms).
True. I'm doing my testing outside of a VM so I can get the cost of the C-states explicitly so our numbers are a bit different.

I can sacrifice the ultimate turbo speed since my rulesets are pretty simplistic and my ISP link is only gigabit. Downloading last night at 96MB/sec only pushed 16% CPU.
I've also been trying to determine if I want to disable C-states or not. I disabled > C1 and did some power tests. It turns out it makes a significant difference in low core count cases as well. For example, for just a 3 core maxed out test the difference is 4W. I've got to decide if the reduced latency is worth it.
 

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
Would you be so kind as to post photos of the "Main" and "Advanced" menus of this unlocked BIOS? I do not have a system for this BIOS yet but would like to understand the BIOS version and the list of "Advanced" menu items.
As @skimikes said, there are a lot of menus and menu items. What you're asking would require a fair bit of work to take photos of them all.
 

roarking

New Member
Aug 28, 2022
18
25
3
As @skimikes said, there are a lot of menus and menu items. What you're asking would require a fair bit of work to take photos of them all.
Specifically I would be interested to know the BIOS version from the "Main" page and if the "Advanced" page supports the feature "Serial Port Console Redirection".
 

beisser

Active Member
Mar 20, 2023
125
36
28
bios version on main screen is 5.26 and i think an option to redirect serial console is there, even though my unit doesnt have any serial port to connect to (havent checked the onboard headers).
 
  • Like
Reactions: roarking

fta

Active Member
Feb 19, 2017
154
163
43
94
Specifically I would be interested to know the BIOS version from the "Main" page and if the "Advanced" page supports the feature "Serial Port Console Redirection".
Serial port console redirection is in the unlocked bios. There is a COM1 header on the motherboard, but it is not broken out to the case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: roarking

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
Specifically I would be interested to know the BIOS version from the "Main" page and if the "Advanced" page supports the feature "Serial Port Console Redirection".
bios1-1.jpgbios2-1.jpg

The menus are vast and deep. Serial port console redirection is in the unlocked BIOS. I don't believe it was in the stock BIOS. Yet another item that should have been exposed that wasn't.

True. I'm doing my testing outside of a VM so I can get the cost of the C-states explicitly so our numbers are a bit different.



I've also been trying to determine if I want to disable C-states or not. I disabled > C1 and did some power tests. It turns out it makes a significant difference in low core count cases as well. For example, for just a 3 core maxed out test the difference is 4W. I've got to decide if the reduced latency is worth it.
The decision between latency and power just makes me hit my head against a wall. I game a lot and so I care about latency, but slightly less than 1ms of latency is way more than my skill level. I just have such a hard time giving up any latency anywhere, which is laughable because as soon as my traffic hits the general internet...
 
  • Like
Reactions: roarking

iceman_jkh

Member
Mar 21, 2023
41
16
8

Attachments

skimikes

Member
Jun 27, 2022
83
79
18
A question regarding cooling.

I'm looking at the Pentium 8505 variant of this box, so thanks for all the great info in this thread!

I noticed there are 2 chassis designs available:

Link 1: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005122939249.html

Link 2: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005346499671.html

Does anyone know which provides better (passive) cooling performance?
(I have my thoughts, but no anecdotal/test evidence)
I have the chassis from Link 1, albeit mine came directly from cwwk rather than Topton.

My cooling numbers are as follows (12 hour idle temps for each orientation):

Horizontal:
Code:
root@proxmox:~# sensors
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Package id 0:  +26.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 0:        +24.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 8:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 9:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 10:       +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 11:       +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

acpitz-acpi-0
Adapter: ACPI interface
temp1:        +27.8°C  (crit = +105.0°C)

nvme-pci-0100
Adapter: PCI adapter
Composite:    +40.9°C  (low  =  -0.1°C, high = +82.8°C)
                       (crit = +83.8°C)
Sensor 1:     +33.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Sensor 2:     +38.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Vertical with the power connector at the bottom:
Code:
root@proxmox:~# sensors
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Package id 0:  +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 0:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 8:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 9:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 10:       +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 11:       +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

acpitz-acpi-0
Adapter: ACPI interface
temp1:        +27.8°C  (crit = +105.0°C)

nvme-pci-0100
Adapter: PCI adapter
Composite:    +36.9°C  (low  =  -0.1°C, high = +82.8°C)
                       (crit = +83.8°C)
Sensor 1:     +29.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Sensor 2:     +33.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Vertical with the power connector at the top:
Code:
root@proxmox:~# sensors
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Package id 0:  +23.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 0:        +25.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 8:        +22.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 9:        +22.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 10:       +22.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 11:       +22.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

acpitz-acpi-0
Adapter: ACPI interface
temp1:        +27.8°C  (crit = +105.0°C)

nvme-pci-0100
Adapter: PCI adapter
Composite:    +34.9°C  (low  =  -0.1°C, high = +82.8°C)
                       (crit = +83.8°C)
Sensor 1:     +27.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Sensor 2:     +31.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
I suspect the unit from the first link will have marginally better cooling given it appears to have larger surface area. The image link you posted is funny since the image on the right (the "high tooth-fins" zoom-in...) doesn't match the second image - it matches the first image. The first link is a newer chassis.

Either would probably be fine, but horizontal is the worst orientation for these units and has been for the 4 models that I have tested so far, so place it on its side if at all possible.
 

beisser

Active Member
Mar 20, 2023
125
36
28
A question regarding cooling.

I'm looking at the Pentium 8505 variant of this box, so thanks for all the great info in this thread!

I noticed there are 2 chassis designs available:

Link 1: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005122939249.html

Link 2: https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005005346499671.html

Does anyone know which provides better (passive) cooling performance?
(I have my thoughts, but no anecdotal/test evidence)
i have the first one and the cooling is definitely adequate for the 8505, especially if its not running fully loaded all the time.
the aluminum fins and chassis are massive, so short bursts of high cpu load wont even set it get that hot.

i am currently running it with an average load of 25-35% on proxmox and my sensors on the unit report this:

Code:
root@pve:~# sensors
coretemp-isa-0000
Adapter: ISA adapter
Package id 0:  +46.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 0:        +46.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 8:        +45.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 9:        +45.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 10:       +42.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)
Core 11:       +42.0°C  (high = +100.0°C, crit = +100.0°C)

acpitz-acpi-0
Adapter: ACPI interface
temp1:        +27.8°C  (crit = +105.0°C)

nvme-pci-0100
Adapter: PCI adapter
Composite:    +42.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +89.8°C)
                       (crit = +94.8°C)
Sensor 1:     +42.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
Sensor 2:     +63.9°C  (low  = -273.1°C, high = +65261.8°C)
as you can see perfectly fine temperatures.

if i stress the system it can become a lot hotter. the whole cpu can get up to 80 degrees, with the only performance core hitting 100 and throttling from 4.4 ghz to about 2.5-3 ghz.

Heat transfer of the chassis is awesome compared to my old topton n5105 unit.
when the cpu actually runs hot the chassis becomes really painful to touch, indicating that it is bleeding off heat from the hot cpu successfully and not just the cpu running hot while the chassis stays at touchable temperatures.

i cannot comment on the second one though. it definitely looks less massive than the unit i have.

edit: the long review on the first link is actually from me :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: rsadix