Has anyone got another copy of this, these links are deadAsk and you shall receive.......... the user manual for x86-P5 aka CW-X86-P5 aka CW-ADLNT-1C2L, useful especially for pin-outs and jumpers
CW-X86-P5-Chinese.pdf - original pdf file
CW-X86-P5-English.pdf - translated from Chinese to English with Google Translate
uploaded to gofile because the forum doesn't accept large files
Gofile - Cloud Storage Made Simple
Secure, fast and free cloud storage solution. Upload and share files instantly.gofile.io
CWWK/Topton/... Nxxx quad NIC router
- Thread starter Becks0815
- Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
Load is good, idling constant at 700Mhz as before!I give you that (especially since I'm not really that Current on my own Sys
Are you still seeing improved Load?
pve-qemu-kvm/stable,now 9.2.0-5 amd64 [installed]
Thanks for the explanation. I think you're pretty much right on all aspects; I visited similar threads on other websites regarding these motherboard and everywhere I see people struggling to get these to actually pull the power they're expected to using such a low power CPU.Welcome to the clubThe PL settings only deal with the maximums and how much power can be drawn and for how long, they don't affect idle power consumption.
I have an older i7 7500U 6 LAN port which draws 4 watts at idle with 3 active network connections, so anything more modern built on more efficient lithography should not be drawing what we typically see when sat at idle.
I think you are right, unlocked settings do not change how these types of board work with power management and C-States, I've certainly seen no differences. So we can only speculate at what is going on. These devices are cheap, and cheap for a reason. Often they cost little more or even sometimes less than the cost of the Intel SoC they house, so we have to be suspicious.
So what could be going on? Well, it could be the AMI BIOS isn't coming with full support for these newer CPUs, and it wouldn't surprise me if the AMI BIOS that arrives on these cheap appliances is unlicensed and outdated. Would Chinese manufacturers ship with an unlicenced out of date BIOS, you bet they would if they can get away with it! For example, Topton advertise the ability as an OEM to supply their PCs with cracked Windows software!
View attachment 43185
Source Toptonpc
Building a motherboard with voltage regulation that can cope with sudden demands for power one millisecond, then dropping to next to nothing a few milliseconds later is expensive, it needs lots of testing and validation, extra components and good quality ones at that, have they just gone cheap on the voltage regulation then disabled power management options so the board remains stable?
The Intel SoCs? Why do we see the same SoCs flooding Aliexpress over the years? The N100 came from nowhere than is everywhere on Aliexpress, with no hardware seemingly able to use less than 12 watts when idle on a chip marketed by Intel for being ultra low power? Yet hardware from other vendors with an N100 can idle at a few watts, whether that is in branded laptops or single board computers from companies like Odroid.
For a long time it was flawed Celeron's in these types of devices being sold too cheap to be true, they never told customers it was because the CPUs were prone to failing over time due to a hardware flaw Intel update on Celeron J1800, J1900, N2807, N2930. Did these type of appliances ever get to ship with fixed steppings of Celeron's or just used to off load bad batches of CPUs? So are Intel selling SoC's that maybe failed validation for low power use (i.e. they aren't stable in low power states) so no good for their target audience of laptops and tablets, so they've been bought up cheap by Chinese factories that hide behind various Aliexpress brands and put to use in mains only devices like this and mini PCs?
A few years ago no one would be too worried about idle power consumption, although perhaps they were indirectly by trying to manage CPU temperatures, which is directly affected by C-States and Package C-States as if they aren't working or not working optimally, more power is used and more heat is generated. Now given the costs some of us pay for electricity, we are taking an interest in idle power consumption.
The other issue with running these chips with C-States disabled is Intel do not guarantee their CPUs for longevity, they are designed to have C-States being entered, so we are potentially running these chips 24/7 with no C-States being entered just to have them fail early, but then that's built in obsolescence and no one seems to expect these cheap devices to last more than a couple of years anyway.
If any representative from these Chinese factories are reading this, now is your chance to set the record straight and explain what is going on.
For what it's worth, on Windows Server I can install HWMonitor and it displays that the CPU package is consuming around 0.5-1W idle, and Linux displays the CPU as entering C-states, but from the wall they always pull anything from 15-20W idle. Either the readings are fake, or the CPU is actually consuming very little but the rest of the system draws a ton for some reason (which wouldn't surprise me from cheap & suspicious components).
Either way I built a NAS+NVR, a Proxmox server and an OPNsense router with these boards and mounted them on a rack but I think I'm finished with them as I'm looking for better power efficiency due to, as you said, rising electricity prices. These boards work fine but people who are looking for low power consumption should be warned that these will be a waste of money in that regard.
Do you have hardware suggestions that are proven to have better (sub-10W hopefully) power consumption I could move my things to? I would appreciate it.
some links
forum.level1techs.com
also everything you add, will increase the idle power consumption, maybe the next time the HBA card is the culprit or the network card
and from my own system
ASPM Disabled all-around
but keep in mind the following idea: how much you will spend a new board vs the power-bill at the current idle Watts?
and the cherry on top, a xlsx file with idle power consumption
from here
www.hardwareluxx.de
Idle power efficiency tests
I’ve seen some reports that the Lsi9500 series and up should support it. The 9500-8I idles at 6w which is much more reasonable compared to previous generations, so I was thinking of getting one.
forum.level1techs.com
also everything you add, will increase the idle power consumption, maybe the next time the HBA card is the culprit or the network card
and from my own system
Code:
PowerTOP 2.14 Overview Idle stats Frequency stats Device stats Tunables WakeUp
Pkg(OS) | CPU(OS) 0
Powered On 0.0% | POLL 0.0% 0.0 ms
C1E 1.4% | C1E 1.6% 0.3 ms
|
|
RC6 0.0% | C6 3.3% 0.8 ms
RC6pp 0.0% |
C8 1.9% | C8 2.9% 1.4 ms
C10 86.8% | C10 85.1% 9.2 ms
| CPU(OS) 1
| POLL 0.0% 0.0 ms
| C1E 1.5% 0.2 ms
|
|
| C6 3.2% 0.9 ms
|
| C8 2.2% 1.5 ms
| C10 86.5% 11.0 ms
| CPU(OS) 2
| POLL 0.0% 0.0 ms
| C1E 1.6% 0.2 ms
|
|
| C6 2.8% 0.8 ms
|
| C8 1.6% 0.8 ms
| C10 87.7% 11.8 ms
| CPU(OS) 3
| POLL 0.0% 0.0 ms
| C1E 1.0% 0.2 ms
|
|
| C6 2.7% 0.9 ms
|
| C8 0.7% 1.5 ms
| C10 87.9% 15.9 ms
| GPU |
| Powered On 0.1% |
| RC6 99.9% |
| RC6p 0.0% |
| RC6pp 0.0% |
| |
| |
| |
| |
Code:
root@pve:~# sudo lspci -vv | awk '/ASPM/{print $0}' RS= | grep --color -P '(^[a-z0-9:.]+|ASPM )'
00:1c.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Device 54ba (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
LnkCap: Port #3, Speed 8GT/s, Width x1, ASPM not supported
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+
00:1c.3 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Device 54bb (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
LnkCap: Port #4, Speed 8GT/s, Width x1, ASPM not supported
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+
00:1d.0 PCI bridge: Intel Corporation Alder Lake-N PCI Express Root Port (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
LnkCap: Port #9, Speed 8GT/s, Width x2, ASPM not supported
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+
01:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Controller I226-V (rev 04)
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L1 <4us
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+
02:00.0 Ethernet controller: Intel Corporation Ethernet Controller I226-V (rev 04)
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 5GT/s, Width x1, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L1 <4us
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+
03:00.0 Non-Volatile memory controller: SK hynix Gold P31/PC711 NVMe Solid State Drive (prog-if 02 [NVM Express])
LnkCap: Port #0, Speed 8GT/s, Width x4, ASPM L1, Exit Latency L1 <64us
LnkCtl: ASPM Disabled; RCB 64 bytes, Disabled- CommClk+but keep in mind the following idea: how much you will spend a new board vs the power-bill at the current idle Watts?
and the cherry on top, a xlsx file with idle power consumption
from here
[Sammelthread] - Die sparsamsten Systeme (<30W Idle)
++ Update ++ Die Liste ist jetzt als Google online Tabelle verfügbar (vielen Dank dafür an -DDD-) und wird nur noch dort weitergepflegt http://goo.gl/z8nt3A Es wurde ja schon öfter vorgeschlagen, mal in einem Thread nur die Mess-Ergebnisse der sparsamsten Systeme zu posten und da sich Niemand...
www.hardwareluxx.de
Thank you for the great information. I see you have very good power usage but it's a CWWK board; maybe it's the BKHD boards in particular with the problem? I remember a similar Beelink EQ12 (N100) used less on default, like 7-8W. But I just can't get my BKHD/Topton board below 14W on Proxmox idle, default or non-default BIOS settings.
The router uses ~18W but according to the benchmarks you posted, it makes sense that the Intel X520 card it has uses the rest of the power/doesn't let it go above C8.
The router uses ~18W but according to the benchmarks you posted, it makes sense that the Intel X520 card it has uses the rest of the power/doesn't let it go above C8.
Yes, I don't think I will replace them now. I will wait they die, or if the electricity price gets too high to a point where it's more rational to get a better board.
on my machine I've used
community-scripts.github.io
community-scripts.github.io
try running powertop before to see the current Pkg states, and always check what the script(s) does, do no run them blindly
Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts
The official website for the Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts (Community) Repository. Featuring over 300+ scripts to help you manage your Proxmox VE environment.
Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts
The official website for the Proxmox VE Helper-Scripts (Community) Repository. Featuring over 300+ scripts to help you manage your Proxmox VE environment.
try running powertop before to see the current Pkg states, and always check what the script(s) does, do no run them blindly
it looks that BKHD 1264N4L is known to have bad idle power consumption
try here, maybe they have an idea
try here, maybe they have an idea
Any ideas regarding a slowly creeping RAM increase?
The symptoms / packages / ... are the same as with the last time this was posted: https://forums.servethehome.com/ind...xxx-quad-nic-router.39685/page-82#post-407853
Luckily, I did have Telegraf running, so I still have the metrics after the crash.
In the attachment, there is both the crash and the situation now, where RAM slowly but steadily creeps up.
Long Timeframe until crash:
Situation now:
RAM (wired) was slowly but steadily creeping up until the box stopped responding / make new connections.
Everything started in the morning, when pfBlocker was not able to refresh the firewall tables due to a failure to allocate memory.
Logs show no specific messages and I was not able to find any solutions online.
Now my question is: Does anyone have any idea where to look or what do do? Otherwise, my first step would be to start fresh with a new install of CE 2.7.2, do just the minimum necessary (LAN+VLAN setup, S2S VPN) and then continue from there.
If any critical details are missing, please let me know. Thank you in advance.
The symptoms / packages / ... are the same as with the last time this was posted: https://forums.servethehome.com/ind...xxx-quad-nic-router.39685/page-82#post-407853
Luckily, I did have Telegraf running, so I still have the metrics after the crash.
In the attachment, there is both the crash and the situation now, where RAM slowly but steadily creeps up.
Long Timeframe until crash:
Situation now:
RAM (wired) was slowly but steadily creeping up until the box stopped responding / make new connections.
Everything started in the morning, when pfBlocker was not able to refresh the firewall tables due to a failure to allocate memory.
Details regarding the specs and packages installed:
- Hardware
- CWWK N100 4-Lan
- 8 GB RAM
- 128 GB M.2 NVMe SSD
- pfSense 2.7.2-RELEASE
- Installed Packages
- acme 0.9_1
- Avahi 2.2_4
- Cron 0.3.8_3
- haproxy 0.63_2
- iperf 3.0.3
- lldpd 0.9.11_2
- nmap 1.4.4_7
- ntopng 0.8.13_10 (but not enabled in settings)
- nut 2.8.2_1
- pfBlockerNG 3.2.0_8
- Service_Watchdog 1.8.7_1
- System_Patches 2.2.11_17
- Tailscale 0.1.4
- Telegraf 0.9_6
- WireGuard 0.2.1
- Setup
- Main LAN
- IoT VLAN with some rule restrictions
- Guest Net routed over OpenVPN
- OpenVPN Client to VPN Provider
- Wireguard S2S connection to pfSense+ Box
- pfBlocker for IP Blacklisting and DNS filtering
- haproxy for accessing hosted services
Logs show no specific messages and I was not able to find any solutions online.
Now my question is: Does anyone have any idea where to look or what do do? Otherwise, my first step would be to start fresh with a new install of CE 2.7.2, do just the minimum necessary (LAN+VLAN setup, S2S VPN) and then continue from there.
If any critical details are missing, please let me know. Thank you in advance.
So there are a couple of ways C-States work and varies a bit with CPU as well. Traditionally, the operating system would decide on what C-States are appropriate based on load, and used a few different methods to notify the CPU to enter those lower power states. As the operating system is in control, it knows for example its requested 90% of time in C3, and 9% in C1, and 1% in C2 and is able to report that to us, we can see this in most operating systems. However that doesn't mean the processor actually entered any of those states, the processor can ignore the requests, either by design or due to bugs in the BIOS or operating system. So whilst it seems C-States are in use by the OS because it reports it, that is only what the OS requested.
Intel Speed Shift, which has been around for a few years now, works the other way around. The processor itself decides on what C-States it should drop into based on load, this means it can learn and react much quicker. It will still take guidance from the operating system as above, but can ignore the requests or alter them, for example the OS might keep requesting C8, but it spends so little time in C8 the cost of going into and out of C8 in such a short time uses more power than is saved, so the CPU will demote the C-State, and might just drop to C2 or C3 and ignore the C8 request, it can also work the other way and decide to enter a higher C-State than requested. Intel Speed Shift can also work completely independently and still enter C-States even if the OS isn't providing any info about doing so. In the BIOS are settings for 'demotion' to tell the CPU how much or little it should override the OS C-State requests.
Because Intel Speed Shift can do its own thing, what the OS reports for times in various C-States is not guaranteed to be the reality. The operating system needs to read from registers in the CPU on what the actual C-State ratios have been rather than just report what it had requested. I don't think all operating systems are updated to correctly read and report directly from the CPU. For example FreeBSD is only reporting what it requests, so its possible to see it showing no C-States have been used even though the CPU is using them independently, and of course the opposite is also true. Therefore the only way to know for sure is a watt meter, if the power consumption doesn't drop from turning on C-States, then they are not in use.
The same applies to reporting in Windows for various watts being drawn, its only calculated on what the OS thinks should be happening, its estimated based on an algorithm, and isn't an actual reading of watts drawn, so this can be just as wrong as C-States.
Unfortunately not. You can still buy an i7 7500U based network appliance as I have now which should easily idle at 4 watt and even feel cold to the touch most of the time due to it sipping so little power, but it only has 1Gig NICs, still it does have about the same processing power as an N100 in many applications, maybe even a bit better, which kind of makes a mockery of Intel's newer so called "low power" chips, they might as well have just stuck with their designs from 2016! (Obviously I think the problem here is 'Direct from China' kit being cheap for a reason which they don't tell us about).
From some of the other discussions one aspect of the N CPUs that seems to add to both their problems and confusion is the integration of the chipset technology. So the device has two sets of c states. Those of the core and those of the peripheral interfaces. The poor idle seems to be driven mainly by the package, rather than the cores. So the interfaces refuse to power down. The real world figures suggest to me that package is also bad at powering down individual portions so it's difficult to even coax it to enter a high states. One incompatible device on one interface may leave the entire package stuck in a low thirsty idle state.
I think I read that the hot plug capability of some buses (SATA, USB, etc) seems to push those interfaces to stay active. So the logic to detect a new drive, etc demands that the interface doesn't power down. For energy efficiency you'd want it to notice when waking up. But presumably that adds to latency and delays, so someone elected for "stay awake".
I think I read that the hot plug capability of some buses (SATA, USB, etc) seems to push those interfaces to stay active. So the logic to detect a new drive, etc demands that the interface doesn't power down. For energy efficiency you'd want it to notice when waking up. But presumably that adds to latency and delays, so someone elected for "stay awake".
Certainly on the mark, and perhaps there are a few layers to this and several issues. Still, before the package can enter lower power states, the CPU cores need to be able to switch to power saving states, and from what I could tell, I never achieved that with my N100 appliance. If a 9 year old design that has the exact same configuration (6 ports, 8Gig memory , SATA drive, 3 network ports active with an SoC chip that has double the TDP rating) can idle at 4 watts just with default settings in the BIOS, something is very wrong when that can't be achieved now on these newer SoCs that should be even more power efficient.
Its all conjecture and assumptions on my part, and I'd love to be proven wrong and know we can buy these cheaper appliances direct from China and not be ripped off in some way, but it appears to me to be more and more by design, and there is something wrong with most, if not all, of these 'Direct from China' type appliances. Is it the case of Intel having shed loads of these SoC/CPUs testing as unstable coming in and out of low power states so can't be used in battery powered devices, then they get sold on for a nice discount (maybe even labelled as engineering samples and not for resale to cover Intel *) for use in anything mains powered instead, and these network appliances are then sold cheap, mostly unbranded, being the perfect way to make use of these otherwise to be scrapped CPUs and recoup some cash back.
* Googling for issues with N100s I found several references from owners of direct from China type PCs having their CPUs identified by Intel's Geninue software checker as 'engineering samples'. Caveat emptor. See
Last edited:
Hi
I have CWWK x86-P6 and i am trying to use the free wifi slot to connect another storage where i can use to boot the system from instead of installing it on one of the 4 NVMEs. I came across this type of adapter where it can use an SD card instead of wifi to NVME adapter and i liked the idea since the device is compact and has small space so an adapter like this with an SD card would fit nicely and add an extra storage that can be used for system boot.
I ordered the adapter from AliExpress but when i installed it there is no LED light to indicate connection or activity and when i checked the kernel logs it can identify the SD card as mmc0 but the kernel fails to initialize it and it is not detected later on when listing the installed storage drives. Has anyone tried this before? if yes, did it work?
Note: I tried different SD card, tried to formate the SD card on another computer and load system to it, but this did not work.
Adapter:
K3NB M2 NGFF Key A.E WIFI Slot to Micro SD SDHC SDXC TF Card Reader T-Flash Card M.2 A+E Card Adapter Kit
Kernel message
I have CWWK x86-P6 and i am trying to use the free wifi slot to connect another storage where i can use to boot the system from instead of installing it on one of the 4 NVMEs. I came across this type of adapter where it can use an SD card instead of wifi to NVME adapter and i liked the idea since the device is compact and has small space so an adapter like this with an SD card would fit nicely and add an extra storage that can be used for system boot.
I ordered the adapter from AliExpress but when i installed it there is no LED light to indicate connection or activity and when i checked the kernel logs it can identify the SD card as mmc0 but the kernel fails to initialize it and it is not detected later on when listing the installed storage drives. Has anyone tried this before? if yes, did it work?
Note: I tried different SD card, tried to formate the SD card on another computer and load system to it, but this did not work.
Adapter:
K3NB M2 NGFF Key A.E WIFI Slot to Micro SD SDHC SDXC TF Card Reader T-Flash Card M.2 A+E Card Adapter Kit
Kernel message
Code:
mmc0 failed to initialize non removable cardRAM will always go up with any modern OS since it over time will have more and more in its caches.
You can verify with "free" whats the actual usage of the box.
why not use directly a m.2 in that slot for the os? this one https://it.aliexpress.com/item/1005008195544608.html fits a 2232 with little modifications and work great, i would not go for a simple sd card for the os.
Do you install also 2280 drive to another slot. Does it fit on top of this adapter? Thanks
Sorry, I mean, this adapter with disk in wifi slot in the same time with another disk in m-key slot...if these two drives fits?
not correctly, it wont fully screw in, but i use one 2232 + one 2280 without issues.