NEW! Topton 10Gb 2xSFP+ 4x2.5Gb i5-1240P

[themeuge]

I had been looking for an unnecessarily fast router that could handle 5Gb or even 10Gb WAN with a ton of pfblocker and suricata rules enabled... and I think I've finally found it. This was delivered from China in less than 2 weeks.

Truly, we live in a crazy time - this is so much more powerful as an edge device than Xeon systems just a couple years old.


https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805527094073.html

I installed a 250gb WD Blue NVMe drive, and 16GB of Crucial DDR5-4800.
I installed Ubuntu 22.04 minimal, and after updates ran Geekbench.


This appears to be significantly faster than the previous version of this system that STH had reviewed (borrowing your picture)


But even more importantly - the system has excellent copper cooling, which has configurable controls in the BIOS, allowing the device to be very quiet, unlike R86-S, certainly inaudible other than at full load next to a Synology with 8xHDDs with PWM 40% (that scales up with temp) and temps in the 40C range.

Using a Kill-a-watt the power consumption is 14W idle, 40W load, 70W full load.

Would love you guys to review this system - I think I finally found something that will make upgrading my 1Gb Google fiber worth it! Not sure how Pfsense handles heterogeneous cores, but I'm thinking with this kind of single-thread performance I could just disable the efficiency cores and still come out way ahead of my current N6005 box.

 

[thepsyborg]

heterogeneous cores [...] just disable the efficiency cores

Granted virtualizing firewalls is rather a contentious subject, but the idea that immediately springs to my mind is to pin the firewall VM to the P-cores (and passthrough the NICs, obviously) and run whatever else you want on the E-cores. Might need an expensive amount of RAM, though, depending on what else you were running on the box.

 

[Debtor8100]

Would love you guys to review this system - I think I finally found something that will make upgrading my 1Gb Google fiber worth it! Not sure how Pfsense handles heterogeneous cores, but I'm thinking with this kind of single-thread performance I could just disable the efficiency cores and still come out way ahead of my current N6005 box.

I'm also very interested in this exact model. Can you verify that there actually are bios options to disable E-cores? I'm planning on running OpnSense baremetal on this and have no use for E-cores before the scheduler has caught up with the architecture.

 

[themeuge]

Was able to import my Pfsense config and running this as my primary router/firewall, using DAC cable on SFP+ to my Unifi Aggregation switch . Slightly higher idle power at about 20W likely due to background network activity compared to 14W during completely idle Ubuntu install. With only 4 P-cores running 2-2.5 GHz idles at 18W.

I was also able to confirm that the Wiitek SFP+to RJ45 works just fine with the 10Gb NIC in this device.

Can you verify that there actually are bios options to disable E-cores? I'm planning on running OpnSense baremetal on this and have no use for E-cores before the scheduler has caught up with the architecture.

I can verify that E cores can be disabled.
However, thus far I found that when E cores are disabled, Pfsense will no longer display "speed shift" options in Advanced\Miscellaneous, which will significantly reduce your maximum clock speed. When I disabled the E cores, the P cores under PowerD Maximum would not go past 2.5GHz, whereas setting performance to max on Speed shift gets you 3.5GHz. 2.5GHz on the P cores is still plenty of performance and you decrease your power consumption about 2W. Would love to see more granular power control as I see nowhere near the 4.4GHz turbo the i5-1240P is rated for.

 

[Debtor8100]

I can verify that E cores can be disabled.
However, thus far I found that when E cores are disabled, Pfsense will no longer display "speed shift" options in Advanced\Miscellaneous, which will significantly reduce your maximum clock speed. When I disabled the E cores, the P cores under PowerD Maximum would not go past 2.5GHz, whereas setting performance to max on Speed shift gets you 3.5GHz. 2.5GHz on the P cores is still plenty of performance and you decrease your power consumption about 2W. Would love to see more granular power control as I see nowhere near the 4.4GHz turbo the i5-1240P is rated for.

Just to confirm: Is that 3,5Ghz max frequency with or without E-cores?

How is Pfsense working with the E-cores? I'm sort of hesitant running these big.Little CPUs with FreeBSD based systems since the scheduler is not really ready for those yet. Does it show in some way while using the system with E-cores?

 

[themeuge]

Just to confirm: Is that 3,5Ghz max frequency with or without E-cores?

How is Pfsense working with the E-cores? I'm sort of hesitant running these big.Little CPUs with FreeBSD based systems since the scheduler is not really ready for those yet. Does it show in some way while using the system with E-cores?

Actually I was wrong - the Speed Shift options are not dependent on E-core state - they were added by a patch that can be enabled in System Patches.

I think the system worked fine with E-cores enabled. Right now I am trying to use just the P-cores and testing out the options. So far the power consumption seems to be a little higher - idles at 22W. Thus far even with E cores disabled frequency doesn't rise above 3.5GHz.

 

[Debtor8100]

Actually I was wrong - the Speed Shift options are not dependent on E-core state - they were added by a patch that can be enabled in System Patches.

I think the system worked fine with E-cores enabled. Right now I am trying to use just the P-cores and testing out the options. So far the power consumption seems to be a little higher - idles at 22W. Thus far even with E cores disabled frequency doesn't rise above 3.5GHz.

Okay, that seems peculiar. 1240P seems a bit underutilized with those clock speeds, N305 actually clocks higher than that. Might that be just something to do with reporting or power supply? The idle power consumption is a bit on the high side, but IMO still within reason. Pity, I thought this might be the best option at the moment. I guess I'll need to wait, new models are fortunately popping up all the time.

If we just could buy N305 in that same chassis, I would buy it in a heartbeat. I almost bought the R86S, but the noise was a dealbreaker. Haven't seen another option with 10G SFP+ ports and N305 (or even N200) outside of that.

 

[tomk]

They are selling this one also with a U300 or a Pentium 8505. Both are very close in performance to the N305. (Intel U300 vs Intel Pentium Gold 8505 vs Intel Core i5-1240P vs Intel Core i3-N305 [cpubenchmark.net] by PassMark Software)


The 8505 comes with 1 perf core and 4 E cores. And it can be had for about $300 plus tax (bare bone) when utilizing the 11/11 discount codes in AliExpress. (https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256805999165913.html)
The U300 comes out to about $345 and the 1240P to about $430.

I am contemplating to get the 8505 as I figured that one might be the best value to build a 10G OpnSense box. 32GB RAM AND 1TB SSD from Amazon will add about $120.

 

[EncryptedUsername]

@themeuge Thanks for posting this.
I am almost ready to buy this same model (1240p) for my incoming fiber installation and was wondering how well its been working out for you.
You are still running pfSense? Which version? The e-core/p-core topic had me interested. Since you won't ever really "know" if a thread gets pinned to an e-core, you might see inexplicable performance drops on say, one VPN connection, vs. another. Maybe this processor is so beefy that it doesn't matter. Some intel documentation suggests that its not possible to disable all e-cores, but this may be processor/BIOS dependent. (Is It Possible to Turn Off E-cores (Efficiency Cores) in BIOS on 12th...)

I am hoping this bad boy will keep up with the ISP speed of 3 Gbps with SNORT, IPSEC etc. Any trouble getting the SFPs recognized by pfSense? Did the i226-V ports just show up as eth0-3? Sorry for the barrage of questions

 

[Stovar]

These newer topton/cwwk units with 10gb ports, will they have enough bandwidth to hit top speeds?

I vaguely recall some people suggesting the N100 mainboards, N100 mini routers not having enough pci bandwidth to hit top speeds, 10gb wise.

 

[blunden]

These newer topton/cwwk units with 10gb ports, will they have enough bandwidth to hit top speeds?

I vaguely recall some people suggesting the N100 mainboards, N100 mini routers not having enough pci bandwidth to hit top speeds, 10gb wise.

If they use a PCI-E 2.0 based NIC (Intel 82599ES etc. that some units use), they will not have enough PCI-E bandwidth.

The Alder Lake-N chips have very few PCI-E lanes (9 lanes of PCI-E 3.0) so it's vital that the NICs are PCI-E 3.0. If they are, then it's possible.

 

[EncryptedUsername]

Does anyone have iPerf results for the 1240p model on the 10G port?

 

[flipper203]

I am also interested in perf with IDS / IPS under opensense.
Another question, about the 10g ports do they both negociate at the same speed or can we have one at 2.5G and the other at 10G ?

 

[Algo]

If they use a PCI-E 2.0 based NIC (Intel 82599ES etc. that some units use), they will not have enough PCI-E bandwidth.

The Alder Lake-N chips have very few PCI-E lanes (9 lanes of PCI-E 3.0) so it's vital that the NICs are PCI-E 3.0. If they are, then it's possible.

It does use the Intel 82599ES NIC, so that's disappointing. If it was a PCIE Gen 3 NIC for the SFP ports, I would have grabbed it for my new router/firewall + Jellyfin setup.

 

[zer0sum]

If they use a PCI-E 2.0 based NIC (Intel 82599ES etc. that some units use), they will not have enough PCI-E bandwidth.

The Alder Lake-N chips have very few PCI-E lanes (9 lanes of PCI-E 3.0) so it's vital that the NICs are PCI-E 3.0. If they are, then it's possible.

Not necessarily true

A PCIe 2.0 x4 slot is all you need for a single 10Gbps port to run at full speed.
For dual ports, you need x8

 

[EncryptedUsername]

Not necessarily true

A PCIe 2.0 x4 slot is all you need for a single 10Gbps port to run at full speed.
For dual ports, you need x8

This article shows some graphs that support the above statement.

Dual 10Gbit network using PCI 2.0 (5GT/s) x4 – what is the maximum bandwidth? | Any IT here? Help Me!

The tech spec page on AliExpress is a bit confusing on the pci-e bus side of things.
It shows the NVME slot is PCI-E 3.0 by 4 lanes. Then it shows the PCI expansion slot is x8 and x4 signal - whatever that means. No mention of the PCI-E version.


Then it shows a similar wording in the pictures.

If I read that right, this matches what @zer0sum posted - there should be enough bandwidth. I only plan on using one of the 10G sfp+ ports.

I have one ordered, I'll post results when I have them in a few weeks.

 

[flipper203]

were did you order it @EncryptedUsername

 

[EncryptedUsername]

were did you order it @EncryptedUsername

I ordered it from AliExpress.

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/1005005713408825.html?gatewayAdapt=4itemAdapt

Make sure to select the right options: processor/ports/ram/storage for your needs.

 

[blunden]

Not necessarily true

A PCIe 2.0 x4 slot is all you need for a single 10Gbps port to run at full speed.
For dual ports, you need x8

If you're just using it as a small server (or as a 2.5G router with a 10G connection to a NAS or something to improve multi-client NAS throughput) and therefore only need one of the ports, sure.

Most people are likely to run these as 10G routers though, which is also what they tend to be marketed as. Then they need both slots to operate at full speed, which it is far from doing at PCI-E 2.0. Therefore, this is still a design flaw when used with an Alder Lake-N platform where you can't afford to waste PCI-E bandwidth like that by running something at PCI-E 2.0 speeds.

This article shows some graphs that support the above statement.

Dual 10Gbit network using PCI 2.0 (5GT/s) x4 – what is the maximum bandwidth? | Any IT here? Help Me!

The tech spec page on AliExpress is a bit confusing on the pci-e bus side of things.
It shows the NVME slot is PCI-E 3.0 by 4 lanes. Then it shows the PCI expansion slot is x8 and x4 signal - whatever that means. No mention of the PCI-E version.

View attachment 34369
Then it shows a similar wording in the pictures.

If I read that right, this matches what @zer0sum posted - there should be enough bandwidth. I only plan on using one of the 10G sfp+ ports.

I have one ordered, I'll post results when I have them in a few weeks.

See my reply above. I just assumed you'd use it as a router, which is what they market it as, and also what most people here presumably want to use it as.

The "x8 seat (x4 signal)" refers to the physical slot being an x8 one, but with only the pins for 4 lanes + power actually connected. Basically it's a x4 slot that physically fits x8 cards.

 

[Stovar]

If you're just using it as a small server (or as a 2.5G router with a 10G connection to a NAS or something to improve multi-client NAS throughput) and therefore only need one of the ports, sure.

Most people are likely to run these as 10G routers though, which is also what they tend to be marketed as. Then they need both slots to operate at full speed, which it is far from doing at PCI-E 2.0. Therefore, this is still a design flaw when used with an Alder Lake-N platform where you can't afford to waste PCI-E bandwidth like that by running something at PCI-E 2.0 speeds.
See my reply above. I just assumed you'd use it as a router, which is what they market it as, and also what most people here presumably want to use it as.

The "x8 seat (x4 signal)" refers to the physical slot being an x8 one, but with only the pins for 4 lanes + power actually connected. Basically it's a x4 slot that physically fits x8 cards.

It sounds like we are still a good year or 2 away from getting a mini router that can make full use in routing, nas and 10G duties, but just a guess.

Would still be interesting to see some iperf benchmarks still.

Do you think its better to get an micro-atx motherboard with few 16x and 4x Pci-e slots and add on Nic cards, maybe something like an intel Core T processor and just build a more powerful router?