New Intel E610 NICs Shown for Low Power 10Gbase-T and 2.5GbE

  • Thread starter Patrick Kennedy
  • Start date
Notice: Page may contain affiliate links for which we may earn a small commission through services like Amazon Affiliates or Skimlinks.
nasbdh9

nasbdh9

Active Member
Aug 4, 2019
208
134
43
5W to 8W power consumption is very high
Although these products are 2~4 ports, in comparison, rtl8127 is 1.95W (rj45) 1W (sfp)
 
Laugh|nGMan

Laugh|nGMan

Member
Nov 27, 2012
53
14
8
From article on front page:
At HPE Discover 2025, I was walking through the Intel booth and stopped cold when I saw a few products. One series shown was its newest 10GbE and 2.5GbE NICs based on the latest Intel E610 chipset.
Click to expand...
Can we double check few points, to me kind a outdated - 5-6 years old tweaked design.
"Dated from Elkhart Lake" means it originates from or is part of the Elkhart Lake generation of products."
"As part of the Atom (Elkhart Lake-I) platform, the E610's primary goal is low power consumption. The entire SoC is designed for fanless operation in rugged environments (e.g., inside a factory machine or a car)."
"Targeted Market: for x550 is Enterprise Servers, Data Centers, Workstations, for e610..... Industrial Automation, Robotics, Automotive, IoT Gateways "

Intel® Ethernet Controller E610 Datasheet

Code: 
                      11.4.2 Typical Power

                  Table 11-9. Typical Active Power

+------------------------------------+---------+
|             Parameter              |  Value  |
+------------------------------------+---------+
| General Conditions:                |         |
|   Link Speed                       | 2x10G   |
|   PCIe                             | Gen4x4  |
+------------------------------------+---------+
| Current Draw by Rail:              |         |
|   VDD_3V3_IO (A)                   | 0.042   |
|   VDD_1V8_IO (A)                   | 0.366   |
|   VDD 0.75V (A)                    | 0.720   |
|   VDD_PLL, VDD_EPHY (0.9V) (A)     | 0.173   |
|   AVDDT 2V3 PHY (A)                | 0.340   |
|   AVDD 0V85 PHY (A)                | 0.820   |
|   DVDD 0V65 PHY (A)                | 1.240   |
+------------------------------------+---------+
| Total Power (W)                    |  3.78   |
+------------------------------------+---------+

Note: Typical conditions: typical material, TJ = 80 °C, nominal voltages,
      and continuous network traffic at link speed.


Here is power consumption for x550-at2 (source page 1119: https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/333369/333369_X550_Datasheet_Rev2.7.pdf)

Code: 
                      Table 12-3. X550-AT2 Power Consumption

+---------------------------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-------------+
|                                 |           3.3 V           |           2.1 V           |           1.2 V           |          0.83 V           |   Device    |
|         Operating Mode¹         +-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+    Total    |
|                                 | Current   |  Power      | Current   |  Power      | Current   |  Power      | Current   |  Power      +-------------+
|                                 |   (mA)    |    (mW)     |   (mA)    |    (mW)     |   (mA)    |    (mW)     |   (mA)    |    (mW)     |   Power(W)  |
+---------------------------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-------------+
| 10 GbE Max (dual)               |        41 |      135.30 |     849.2 |     1783.32 |      1102 |     1322.40 |      9849 |     8174.67 |        11.4 |
| 10 GbE Max (dual) 30 m Reach    |        40 |      132.00 |       785 |     1648.50 |      1107 |     1328.40 |      7322 |     6077.26 |         9.2 |
| 10 GbE (dual idle)              |        46 |      151.80 |       860 |     1806.00 |       946 |     1135.20 |      6474 |     5373.42 |         8.5 |
| 10 GbE (single)                 |        50 |      165.00 |       614 |     1289.40 |       793 |      951.60 |      4443 |     3687.69 |         6.1 |
| 10 GbE (dual) 30 m reach        |        45 |      148.50 |       809 |     1698.90 |       993 |     1191.60 |      5070 |     4208.10 |         7.2 |
| 10 GbE (dual) 3 m reach         |        41 |      135.30 |       786 |     1650.60 |       987 |     1184.40 |      4815 |     3996.45 |         7.0 |
| 5 GbE (dual)                    |        46 |      151.80 |       828 |     1738.80 |       856 |     1027.20 |      4530 |     3759.90 |         6.7 |
| 2.5 GbE (dual)                  |        46 |      151.80 |       816 |     1713.60 |       906 |     1087.20 |      2858 |     2372.14 |         5.3 |
| 1 GbE (dual)                    |        45 |      148.50 |       855 |     1795.50 |       908 |     1089.60 |      1677 |     1391.91 |         4.4 |
| 1 GbE (single)                  |        53 |      174.90 |       622 |     1306.20 |       802 |      962.40 |      1500 |     1245.00 |         3.7 |
| 100 Mb/s (dual)                 |        46 |      151.80 |       477 |     1001.70 |       681 |      817.20 |      1292 |     1072.36 |         3.0 |
| 100 Mb/s (single)               |        53 |      174.90 |       435 |      913.50 |       680 |      816.00 |      1294 |     1074.02 |         3.0 |
| 1 GbE WoL (dual)                |        65 |      214.50 |       844 |     1772.40 |       758 |      909.60 |      1181 |      980.23 |         3.9 |
| 1 GbE WoL (single)              |        71 |      234.30 |       616 |     1293.60 |       639 |      766.80 |       976 |      810.08 |         3.1 |
| 100 Mb/s WoL (dual)             |        66 |      217.80 |       475 |      997.50 |       526 |      631.20 |       799 |      663.17 |         2.5 |
| 100 Mb/s WoL (single)           |        71 |      234.30 |       436 |      915.60 |       531 |      637.20 |       767 |      636.61 |         2.4 |
+---------------------------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-----------+-------------+-------------+
¹ Note: Max defined as 105 C Tj and 3 sigma FAST silicon. All others measured at 80 C and typical silicon.
 
Last edited:
W

WhiteNoise

Member
Jan 20, 2024
82
29
18
I am not particularly impressed by this card. This seems a respin of the X550 (uses the same kernel driver) but manufactured with a newer node and hence the improved power consumption (which is great!).

However, feature-wise, this is behind the X710 (no Dynamic Device Personalization (DDP) filtering and no enhanced DPDK support, and behing e8xx (no ROCE).

I also find it disappointing that this card is not more compact. The X550-t2 is smaller.

The way I see it, this card is intended for control plane only.
 
Last edited:
( )

( )

Member
Jul 8, 2017
45
5
8
Certainly a lot of comments on this article.

> "... One series shown was its newest 10GbE and 2.5GbE NICs based on the latest Intel E610 chipset. This is a new lower-end networking solution that will bring lower power to some key markets.

Intel E610 NICs Shown for Low Power 10Gbase-T and 2.5GbE
The first adapter did not look like anything too exciting, until I realized what it was. This is a PCIe Gen4 x4 adapter for dual 10Gbase-T connectivity. It is based on the new Intel E610 chipset".


I missed why / how the six series is new or exciting, since it's actually more costly, slower, and has fewer features than the eight series:

6: Intel® Ethernet Network Adapter E610-XT2 - Product Specifications | Intel

7: Intel® Ethernet Network Adapter X710-T2L - Product Specifications | Intel

8: Intel® Ethernet Network Adapter E810-XXVDA2 - Product Specifications | Intel

Might as well use the eight and run it at 10GbE, it supports copper and optical.
 
W

WhiteNoise

Member
Jan 20, 2024
82
29
18
The only thing that this card has really great is the power consumption (sub 5W).

However, I believe the X710-t2l has actual power consumption lower that reported on the datasheet (9W). The x710-da2 (~4W) paired with modern (sub 2w) sfp+ to basedT module is also very competitive.

Again, I believe that this card is intended for the control plane (out of band management) and that's it.

I would like to see the actual power consumption of the E830-XXVDA2 (the successor of the E810), the number on the datasheet does not look promising, but the actual numbers might be better.
 
( )

( )

Member
Jul 8, 2017
45
5
8
WhiteNoise said:
...
I would like to see the actual power consumption of the E830-XXVDA2 (the successor of the E810), the number on the datasheet does not look promising, but the actual numbers might be better.
Click to expand...
Looking at the product brief: "Intel® Ethernet Network Adapter E810-XXVDA2", it uses double the wattage; but the enormous additional features that the hardware supports would certainly save a few watts of CPU power, not to mention the advantages of offloading to the NIC.


( https://cdrdv2-public.intel.com/641674/Intel Ethernet Network Adapter E810-XXVDA2 Product Brief.pdf )
 
W

WhiteNoise

Member
Jan 20, 2024
82
29
18
The E830-XXVDA2 should be more power efficient than the E810-XXVDA2 since it's manufactured with a newer note (Intel 7). I have tested many cards and sometimes the numbers reported on the datasheet are deceiving.
For example, I pretty sure that the mellanox cards consume more power than what's on their datasheets.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom