Can you go in this system's BIOS and see what can be tweaked and what the default settings are? Also, how many network ports does it have?
The BIOS settings are as good as identical as I've seen on these network appliances, still I see no ASPM options for power settings. The CPU Power settings default to identical settings as the CWWK style BIOS. You'd be hard pressed to tell them apart. Also the package power when shown in Windows on the CWWK devices will report a couple of watts at idle and CPU frequency will drop to about 400MHz, so I'm pretty sure the CPU is entering low power modes, but there is some hardware issue that means something is still burning up a lot of power.
I don't recall anyone hitting four watts with the CWWK-style network appliance n100 boxes, but people are getting below 10 with BIOS tuning. So it would be a better "apples to apples" comparison if we check BIOS settings - it's possible your system ships with some of the power tuning tweaks discussed here already applied.
I've seen about about 9.5 watt on my CWWK appliance but typically its 10.5 to 11 watt. BIOS power tuning as far as I can see really only relates to maximum power usage, i.e. making sure it can't overheat or crash due to trying to use more power than can be supplied, and by default, the BIOS is set to allow the CPU to use as little as possible with light or no loads (Max C states and Speedstep enabled etc).
For context, my existing network appliance from several years ago, using a much older less efficient CPU (i7 7500U), still with 6 network ports and 3 connected and live, idles at 5 watt, and I didn't need to tweak anything to get it that low.
Emphasis mine. Is that a single 8GB DIMM or two 4GB DIMMs? I believe all the CWWK-style network appliance boxes are DDR5, so that's a difference. Also another reason to take a look at your BIOS settings, to see what voltage and speed your RAM is running. I can't recall if RAM voltage/speed tweaking has been attempted on the CWWK style boxes to reduce power draw. But DDR5 is generally faster than DDR4, so I would expect the performance ceiling of your system to be lower than a similar DDR5-based system. At low-to-idle loads it likely doesn't matter though.
This mini-PC has 8GB DDR4 as a single DIMM. DDR5 should use less power, around 20% less power is quoted compared to DDR4, so making these CWWK appliances looking even worse in comparison to my older network appliance or other mini-PCs using DDR4 but the same Intel N100 chips.
So to sum up, something is seriously wrong with these CWWK appliances, they are drawing far too much power at idle, just what is burning that extra 6-7 watts? Have they upped the voltages somewhere due to instability from a design flaw or they are using a low binned batch of Intel CPUs that they've got for cheap that crash in lower power states, so this batch has ended up in cheap mains powered network appliances as they are no good in laptops? This is China we are talking about, you can't rule anything out and no one puts a brand name on these boxes
Whilst the extra in electricity costs isn't going to break most peoples bank accounts, and many are happy sitting fans on these boxes, what about the long term reliability? I guess time will tell with that one.