Wireless
Participate in insightful discussions regarding issues related to Intel® Wireless Adapters and technologies
7587 Discussions

A question related with M.2: CNVio2 port and AX210/Killer™ Wi-Fi 6E AX1675 (x/w)

Dekarios
Novice
1,543 Views
So I'm currently using a Lenovo Legion Legion7 15IMHg05, the processor is i7-10875h. The chipset is HM470 and the default Wi-Fi adapter is AX201 in a M.2: CNVio2 slot, which is not fulfilling my need at the moment. So I think that it is time to make an upgrade.
But according to my personal research, AX211 and AX411 only works with processors that is 12th generation and later.

So my question is, can I use an AX210, or a Killer™ Wi-Fi 6E AX1675 (x/w) on my laptop. Which means plunging a Wi-Fi(PCIe) adapter into a M.2: CNVio2 port.

In additional, I have already asked the same question from Lenovo, unfortunately they have not yet replied since 25 December 2023
Labels (1)
0 Kudos
1 Solution
Dekarios
Novice
1,102 Views
After a series of testing, It has been proved that AX1675 is working as intended. There is a PCIex1 tunnel reserved on the board together with the 'old' CNVio2 tunnel which, making it accessible to both Bluetooth 5.3 and Wi-Fi6E.

View solution in original post

0 Kudos
8 Replies
LeonWaksman
Super User
1,521 Views

You may plug AX210 into M.2 CNVIo2 slot, but it will not work. Please read the NOTE in the bottom of this document.

 

Leon

 

0 Kudos
Dekarios
Novice
1,512 Views
The document only specifics that: those CRFs can only be used with select Intel processors/chipset. Because technically speaking, part of the adapter is integrated in the chipset/adapter. So you can't plug them into a regular NGFF socket.

But that doesn't mean that M.2: CNVio2 port is not compatible to regular NGFF Wi-Fi adapter. It doesn't specify that. And according to my knowledge, NGFF adapter is an adapter by itself, so the only problem will be is there at least a PCIex1 and an USB2.0. Because I'm not looking for a WiGig adaptor, so a PCIex1 should run the wireless part as intended (if there is any, which is why I'm asking), and Bluetooth service will run on USB2.0, which I don't actually care about.

So is there any other document /fact that you can provide to prove your statement? I just want to know why exactly it would not work as you said so please don't feel offended by my debating act, thank you.
0 Kudos
LeonWaksman
Super User
1,489 Views

Probably your are right. It may work and sometime may not work. Depends on the computer. Therefore you have no answer from Lenovo.   I doubt that you will get some confirmation from Intel. 

I  found some information on network that may be interesting for you: 

Upgrading laptops with CNVio WiFi adapters (eg Intel AC 9560) to newer Intel WiFi 6 (AX200) WiFi 6e (AX210) WiFi 7 (BE200) cards

 

Intel® Wi-Fi 6E AX210

 

 

Leon

 

 

 

Dekarios
Novice
1,103 Views
After a series of testing, It has been proved that AX1675 is working as intended. There is a PCIex1 tunnel reserved on the board together with the 'old' CNVio2 tunnel which, making it accessible to both Bluetooth 5.3 and Wi-Fi6E.
0 Kudos
n_scott_pearson
Super User
1,080 Views
Actually, a USB 2.x port (also routed to the connector) is used to independently support Bluetooth operation. The CNVio2 and PCIe channels are used exclusively for Wireless support.
Just saying,
...S
Dekarios
Novice
1,023 Views
Well...... It just works, because the document I got indicating the circuit does not show the presence of any USB 2.x connected. Either it does run on a mysterious way, sharing an unknown USB 2.x from no where, or it just shared another tunnel with an even more mysterious way according to what you have said which should be true......
0 Kudos
n_scott_pearson
Super User
1,017 Views

Consult https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/M.2 for more information on the Type E connector that is used. You will see that a USB 2.x lane from the chipset is routed to this connector and Bluetooth functionality is accessed via it. Microsoft pushed for  this standardization so that USB Bluetooth dongles and adapters could be supported identically at the driver level.

...S

0 Kudos
Dekarios
Novice
591 Views
I get your point, but as long as it works, I am not going to question. But still, you should explain it to Lenovo other than me, because it was their circuit diagram which lead me to this assumption, I see no presence of what you claimed that should exist and actually work that way. Maybe just assume that I'm blind so that we could end the discussion, since it would be impossible for me to provide you with the diagram and telling you how I get it.
0 Kudos
Reply