Really disappointing that CPU and RAM are soldered on, especially in a desktop. I understand there were difficulties but the answer is “don’t build the shitty thing”, not “couldn’t find a way of making it not shitty”.
Yeah I definitely agree. The right call would’ve been to not release this, even if I understand it’s very tempting for them.
It’s sad because now they’re bringing problems they set out to solve in laptops to the desktop space. It’s a bit backwards. Hopefully this isn’t a sign of them straying further from the goal.
It’s not a question of “engineering perspective” vs “trust, values, and brand protection”. It’s a necessity to realize the desired level of performance (which is desired by a non-insignificant amount of people, see also: democratization of AI).
To bring an analogy, if you’re building a car, the practical necessity for said car to have 4 wheels has higher priority than dislike of wheels as a concept. The other way lies madness FSF and their endorsement of 802.11n NICs in 2025.
No-one told Framework they had to build a car, though! If it’s not currently possible to build an AI optimised machine without compromising on their principles, then … don’t.
If it’s not currently possible to build an AI optimised machine without compromising on their principles, then … don’t.
You are missing the forest for the trees.
The principles of Framework is to build things that are more repairable than their competitors. Without Framework, a user who wants a workstation built on an energy-efficient, GPU-capable, highly memory-optimized SoC has no options other than Apple and maybe some NUC-style prebuilts (thus, no repairable/upgradeable options at all). With Framework, there now is a repairable option, even if it’s less repairable than some would want.
I think the difference in our opinions might be over just whether such a “highly memory optimised SoC” is Right or Wrong.
I think what Framework has built is Good and Wrong. Hence my claim that it’s bad from a brand perspective.
Sample data of only myself, but, I’ve gone from being quite an evangelist for Framework to seeing them as just another box maker. The horns effect (opposite of the halo effect) from association with AI probably doesn’t help either. Feels very bandwagony.
My personal take is that both are important to have around and it’s unlikely that people as committed to the bit as FSF folks would even buy something from Framework. Maybe I’ve misjudged the target audience though.
I’m not one of the “FSF folks” for a variety of reasons; I bought my wife and I each a Framework laptop, because I greatly value modularity and repairability.
As personal computing hardware becomes ever more appliance-like and user hostile, it was a delight to find a company with values similar to mine, and products to match.
But, surprise! Looks like the allure of hopping on the AI gravy train was too strong. Seems Framework is content to be a shitbox manufacturer who just happens to have some decent models in their lineup.
To use your analogy, you wouldn’t buy a car with non replaceable wheels and tyres.
That’s not my analogy, that’s a different analogy that happens to use the same metaphor. Unfortunately, this analogy seems unsound, since tyres (and, to a lesser extent, rims) are a consumable item, unlike CPU and RAM.
Why make a modular desktop when they all are anyway? What can they bring new to the table?
I posted my take on this question somewhere downthread.
So having made that trade-off, what differentiates them from any other straight-to-landfill consumer appliance manufacturer?
This is such a tone-deaf move. I’d worried about them abandoning their principles once they grew, it never occurred to me that they’d start selling shit like this so early in the piece.
At a glance, they have a very good reason for doing this. Shared RAM with a humongous bus to the SoC is the only way to compete with, e.g., Apple Silicon.
Framework isn’t supposed to be competing with Apple Silicon by building better Apple Silicon; they’re supposed to be offering an alternative to the consumer appliance / landfill model.
Well, yes :) But that’s the messaging they’ve run with to date, and attracted a lot of quite vocal supporters along the way. This move might lose a bunch of them; we’ll see.
I think about something like the RasPi with closed source firmware blobs on some components, where they can build something that makes some improvements, and then continue to push the boundaries as time goes on.
I do agree with the sentiment regarding a desktop in particular. I’m looking at this more like a giant NUC but it’s odd positioning! The only sort of side note is at least given the form factor the machine will likely last way longer than laptops do with all their random issues due to their usage patterns.
You kill performance if you force the CPU to communicate with the RAM over a socketed connection.
That’s why Apple Silicon puts CPU, GPU and RAM into the same package, so that there can be a super high bandwidth connection between memory and processing units.
That’s also why high end discrete GPUs use HBM (high bandwidth memory) in the same package as the GPU.
Framework also sells a discrete GPU, an AMD Radeon™ RX 7700S for $550. It has 8GB of GDDR6 RAM that is soldered in, again for performance reasons.
The tragedy of the Framework 16 is that you get to choose between an integrated GPU that has slow access to socketed main memory, or you can use the discrete GPU, which has fast soldered local memory, but then it’s very slow to transfer data between CPU memory and GPU memory. You have two GPUs, but both suffer from performance compromises.
I would like to see a Framework 16 mainboard that has the same architecture as the new desktop mainboard. A high performance GPU and a high performance CPU, both sharing the same high performance memory (aka integrated memory). This would seem to require soldered RAM, or RAM inside an integrated CPU/GPU SOC package.
People who want this kind of high performance architecture in a laptop currently buy macbooks. But it would be nice if Framework were to offer this too.
The Framework desktop has this architecture, so I see it as a step in the right direction.
The difference in memory bandwidth isn’t that high anymore. The M processors had an edge when desktop CPUs were still at DDR4, but with DDR5 you get around 100GB/s (dual channel). The current M4 has a memory bandwidth of 120GB/s. The M4 Pro has 273GB/s, M4 Max has 410GB/s and M2 Ultra has 800GB/s, for transparency, but they are at another pricepoint where you can just as well build a threadripper or even EPYC workstation with up to 700+ GB/s memory bandwidth and orders of magnitude more RAM (Apple charges a lot for RAM and storage).
There still are other advantages of the M processors (latency, etc.) which can’t be beaten without a SoC approach, but the flexibility gained with building your own system is still a more important matter to me personally. There’s also DDR6 on the horizon, but nothing stops Apple from using it as well in their chips. Just as well, nothing stops AMD or Intel from increasing the number of memory channels.
Having owned a Framework since April of 2022, I cannot recommend them to people who need even basic durability in their devices. Since then, I have done two mainboard replacements, two top cover replacements, a hinge replacement, a battery replacement, several glue jobs after the captive screw hubs sheared from the plastic backing…
It’s just such an absurdly fragile device with incredibly poor thermals. They sacrificed a ton of desirable features to make the laptop repairable, but ultimately have released a set of devices that, when used in real-world settings, end with you repairing the device more often than not. And these repairs are often non-trivial.
I will personally be migrating to another machine. The Framework 12’s focus on durability may be trending in the right direction, but to regain trust, I’d need to see things like drop and wear tests. A laptop that can be repaired, but needs constant upkeep/incredibly delicate handling, is ultimately not an actual consumer device, but a hobbyist device.
Maybe they’ll get better in a few years. Maybe the Framework 12 will be better. Their new focus on AI, the soldered RAM in the desktop offering, and the failure to address the flimsy plastic chassis innards, among other things, mean that they have a long way to go.
It’s definitely a “be part of the community that helps solve our product problems” sort of feeling.
I have an AMD FW13, and was trying to figure out why it loses 50+% of its battery charge overnight when I close the lid, because I don’t use this computer every single day and don’t want to have remember to charge yet another device.
So I check the basics-I’m running their officially supported Linux distro, BIOS is current, etc. And half an hour into reading forum threads about diagnosing sleep power draw, I realize that this is not how I want to spend my time on this planet. I love that they’re trying to build repairable/upgradeable devices, but that goal doesn’t matter so much if people end up ditching your products for another option because they’re just tired of trying to fix it.
I’ll chime in with the opposite experience - I’ve owned an AMD Framework 13 since it came out, and had no durability issues with it whatsoever, and it’s been one of my 2 favorite computers I’ve ever owned. I’ve done one main board replacement that saved my butt after a bottle of gin fell over on top of it in transport.
Development and light gaming (on Linux, I very much appreciate their Linux support) have been great, and the reparability both gives me peace of mind, an upgrade path, and has already saved me quite a bit of money.
I’ve owned a framework since Batch 1. Durability has not been a problem for me. My original screen has a small chip in it from when I put it in a bag with something that had sharp edges and pressured the screen for a whole flight. Slowly growing. Otherwise, it’s been solid.
Same. I have a batch 1. There are quirks, which I expected and knew I am supporting a startup with little experience. I since have upgraded and put my old board into a cooler master case. This is so amazing, and what I cared about. I am still super happy with having bought the Framework and particular for tinkerers and people who will have a use for their old mainboards it’s amazing.
I get harbouring resentment for a company you felt sold then a bad product. But at the same time, you bought a laptop from a very inexperienced company which was brand new at making laptops, a pretty difficult product category to get right when you’re not just re-branding someone else’s white-label hardware.
3 years have passed since then, if I were in the market for a category which Framework competes in these days I would be inclined to look at more recent reviews and customer testimonials. I don’t think flaws in that 3 year old hardware is that relevant anymore. Not because 3 years is a particularly long time in the computer hardware business, but because it’s a really long time relative to the short life of this particular company.
I would agree that 3 years is enough time for a company to use their production lessons to improve their product. But nothing has changed in the Framework 13.
I don’t resent Framework. I think that’s putting words in my mouth. I just cannot, in good faith, recommend their products to people who need even a semi-durable machine. That’s just fact.
a very inexperienced company which was brand new at making laptops
Founded by people who had experience designing laptops already, and manufactured by a company that manufactures many laptops. Poor explanations for the problems, IMO.
I’ve had a 12th gen Intel since Sept 2022 (running NixOS btw) and I have not had any issues, I will admit it sits in one place 99% of the time. I might order the replacement hinge since mine is a bit floppy but not too big a deal.
As for the event, I was hoping for a minipc using the 395 and I got my wish. Bit pricey and not small enough for where I want to put it and I have no plans for AI work so it’s probably not the right machine for me.
I was originally interested in the HP machine coming with the same CPU (which should be small enough to fit) but I’ve been pricing an AMD 9950 and it comes out cheaper. I was also disappointed there wasn’t a sku with 385 Max w/64GB of RAM , which I might have have ordered to keep the cost down.
For reference a new machine is intended to replace a 10 year old Devils Canyon system.
I’ve also had my Framework 13 since beginning of 2022. I’ve had to do a hinge replacement, input cover replacement, and mainboard replacement. But I sort of expected that since it’s a young company and hardware is hard. And through all of it support was very responsive and helpful.
I would expect that nowadays the laptops are probably more solidly built than those early batches!
Support was definitely helpful. I just don’t have time or money to replace parts on my machine anymore.
From what I understand, the laptops aren’t any stronger. Even the Framework 16 just got some aftermarket/post-launch foam pads to put below the keyboard to alleviate the strain on the keyboard. The entire keyboard deck would flex.
The fact that these products have these flaws makes me wonder how Framework organizes its engineering priorities.
When compared to other similar laptops from brands like HP or Lenovo, how does the deck flex compare? I definitely feel sympathetic to not being better or on par with Apple - given the heaps of money Apple has for economies of scale + lots of mechanical engineers, but it would be a bit rough if mid-tier laptops in that category were far superior.
The deck flex is on par with or worse than an HP EliteBook circa 2019. The problem is that it’s incredibly easy to bend the entire frame of the machine, to the point where it interferes with the touchpad’s ability to click.
It’s really bad, bordering on unexcusable. The fact that there’s no concrete reinforcment says that they sacrificed build quality for repairability, which is equivalent to making a leaky boat with a very fast bilge pump.
I’m not sure what you’re doing to your laptop; how are you bending the entire frame of the machine?
It’s a new company that is largely doing right by open source, and especially open hardware. The quality isn’t incredible but it is worth its value, and I find these claims you’re making dubious.
It’s a fairly common flex point for the chassis, and a common support problem. The base of the mousepad, towards the front of the laptop where there’s a depression in the case, is where the majority of the flex is.
My laptop has seen nothing but daily, regular use. You can find the claims dubious, but others are having them too.
I’ll chime in too: I’ve had the Framework 13 AMD since it came out (mid 2023) and it has been great.
I upgraded the display after the new 2.8K panel came out, it took 2 minutes. Couple months later it developed some dead pixels, so they sent me a replacement. In the process of swapping it out, I accidentally tore the display cable. It took me a while to notice/debug it, but in the end it was just a $15 cable replacement that I’m fairly sure would have otherwise resulted in a full mainboard replacement for any other laptop. (When I had Macbooks, I lost count how many times Apple replaced the mainboard for the smallest thing.)
I haven’t been too precious with it, I toss it around like I did my Thinkpad before this. There’s some scuffs but it has been fine, perhaps the newer models are more sturdy? It’s comforting to know that if anything breaks, I’ll be able to fix it.
I also run NixOS on it, it does everything I need it to do, the battery life is great (8-10 hours of moderate use) and I’ll happily swap out the battery in a few more years once it starts losing capacity.
I spend so much of my life at the computer that feeling a sense of ownership over the components makes a lot of sense to me. I don’t want to feel like I’m living in a hotel.
It is, in fact, how I want to spend my time on this planet.
To add to the chorus, I bought a 12th gen intel framework 13 on release and it’s been flawless so far. Nixos worked out of the box. I love the 3:2 screen. I can totally believe that a small/young manufacturing company has quality control issues and some people are getting lemons, but the design itself seems solid to me.
On my old dell laptop I snapped all the usb ports on one side (by lifting up the other side while keyboard/mouse were still connected). Since they’re connected directly to the motherboard they weren’t repairable without buying a new cpu. If I did the same on the framework it would only break the $12 expansion cards and I wouldn’t even have to turn it off to replace them.
Later I dropped that same dell about 20cm on to a couch with the screen open. The impact swung the screen open all the way and snapped the hinges. They wanted me to send it back for repairs but I couldn’t handle the downtime, so for a year I just had the hinges duck-taped together. I’ve dropped my framework the same way, but because the screen opens the full 180 degrees it doesn’t leverage the hinges at all. And if it did break I’d be able to ship the part and replace it myself.
Not that I support the desktop offering as anything but waste, but the soldered RAM is apparently all about throughput:
We spent months working with AMD to explore ways around this but ultimately determined that it wasn’t technically feasible to land modular memory at high throughput with the 256-bit memory bus. (source)
I wish I could name something in good faith that was comparable to a hyper-repairable x86-64 laptop. Lenovo is pivoting towards repairability with the T14 Gen 5, but I can’t recommend that either yet.
Star Labs, System76, some old Thinkpad models.. there are “competitive” things, but few things that pitch the things Framework does.
While I agree on some of that, I must stress that I’ve had hardware that was fine until just one thing suddenly broke and everything was unusable. I’ll try an analogy: with repairability, if all your components are 99% reliable and working, the whole machine is at 99% but without it, even if all of them are at 99.9% instead, when you have 10 components, you’re not in a better situation overall.
And I say that while I need to finish going through support for a mainboard replacement due to fried USB ports on a first-gen machine (although not an initial batch). BTW, funnily I’m wondering if there’s an interaction with my yubikey. I also wish the chassis was a bit sturdier but that’s more of a wish.
As for thermals, while I think they could probably be better, the 11th gen Intel CPU that you have (just like I do) isn’t great at all: 13th gen ones are much better AFAIK.
I’ve experienced a full main board failure which led to me upgrading to a 12th gen on my own dime.
The thermal problems are still there, and their fans have some surprising QA problems that are exacerbated by thermal issues.
I wish I could excuse the fact that my machine feels like it’s going to explode even with power management. The fans grind after three replacements now, and I lack the energy and motivation to do a fourth.
I think 12th gen is pretty similar to 11th gen. I contemplated the upgrade for similar reasons but held off because I didn’t need to know and the gains seemed low. IIRC it’s really with 13th gen that Intel improved the CPUs. But I agree the thermals/power seems sub-par; I feel like it could definitely be better.
BTW, I just “remembered” that I use mine mostly on my desk and it’s not directly sitting on it which greatly improves its cooling (I can’t give hard numbers but I see the temps under load are better and max CPU frequency can be maintained).
Sorry to hear about the trouble with your Framework 13. To offer another data point: I have a 12th gen Framework 13 and haven’t needed to repair a thing, I’m still super happy with it. The frame-bending I’ve also not seen, it’s a super sturdy device for me.
People keep complaining about that soldered RAM and CPU, but as a counterpoint - I don’t care. I usually buy my PCs in a maxed out configuration, and then just ride them / give away until they are really useless, and do not really make upgrades. It’s a downside, sure, but not a big one.
I also really enjoy small form yet powerful and quiet PCs. I have a custom one built (4th or 5th in 2 decades), and took some effort to match and find the parts, assemble. Framework Desktop in comparison seems way better integrated (stuff fit inside better), and the pricing is really good. I could recommend it to someone that just wants a well made PC and is not a tech enthusiast, I could buy it myself to save time and risk.
I don’t understand the necessity for a Framework Desktop edition. It’s just more waste. Just make a better laptop or sell it headless. It would also be nice to see consistency in the offerings instead of 12 being Intel, 13 being AMD AI thingy, 16 being last-gen AMD etc.
I don’t know what “waste” means here. I also don’t understand what the significant difference is in your mind between a “headless laptop” and a “desktop with laptop components”. Are you complaining that the desktop doesn’t come with worse cooling and a built-in keyboard?
The way I see it, if Framework has the capacity to build and sell a desktop computer, and they expect it to sell well enough to cover costs, it’s not hurting anything. For a small company there’s always the risk of spreading yourself too thin, but I don’t think any of us have enough insight into their operations to tell if that’s happening here.
When I say a headless laptop I mean it literally, as in a Framework 13 with some nubs on the hinge or just a plastic block instead of a screen assembly. No keyboard either, make a keyboard-slot-shaped fan assembly for cooling or something - they’re smart people, they could figure it out. The only thing weird about it would be the form factor not being the box shape desktop users are used to. I am making the complaint you’re trying to dismiss. “Waste” is more plastic crap and manufacturing supply chain crap, from moulds to energy usage to time expenditure.
Framework 13 insides exist in both AMD and Intel variants, in various generations
Framework Desktop uses a technically laptop chip but can’t be adequately cooled in the laptop form factor (which is also the reason hardly any laptops with the chip exist). I was looking for a semi-portable small form factor PC and imo this is actually better because it’s smaller than any SFF PC you could build, while still being much more powerful than a NUC-style PC. Its main selling point is LLMs and other GPGPU compute due to the vast unified memory, not much competition in the specific space and GPUs being much more expensive.
You can already have headless ones. I think there’s even a case on their shop.
edit:
As for the variety in CPUs, I think they started with intel partly because TB4 but then they started a partnership with AMD (and AMD CPUs are definitely in a better position now). Moreover, I’ve seen much more variety with other manufacturers (to a point that’s maddening tbh). Finally, the “AMD AI” is AMD’s marketing name: just ignore that part of the name.
I’m a little sad that CPU and RAM are soldered on. They claim they were unable to find a modular solution without sacrificing performance. Interested into seeing some reviews soon.
I’ll always choose the bandwidth and performance over socketed components. Truth is, many people want socketed components, but then never do anything with it. In fact, the vast majority of PC owners follow this. It’s a small portion of enthusiasts who might upgrade.
If you think about it a bit, it really doesn’t make as much sense as it could seem to make at first. Who, exactly, upgrades RAM? Broadly, I know two categories of people: laptop owners and people who lack enough funds to build a workstation to their liking at once (so they end up buying less RAM than they wanted, with the intent to buy the rest in future).
Upgrading RAM in a laptop is somewhat of a self-inflicted pain: many laptops are sold with woefully inadequate RAM, and sticking more RAM into an already owned laptop is one of the very few ways to delay the obsolescence of a given hardware platform. This is not a problem here.
Framework is not a cheap vendor, not even a cost-effective one. This automatically self-selects for people who do have enough funds to purchase a workstation to their preferred spec. So, again, not a problem here.
I had ram failure that would cause weird errors on my T480s. Luckily it was the external ram that failed and not the soldered one or else my laptop wouldve been e-waste. Now 5 years in, it’s still running extremely smoothly.
I have just bought more ram for my work machine which is about 1 year old. I switched from python to android development which is much more memory hungry due to emulators and large IDEs. So I’m upgrading from 32 to 64 gigs.
I have also upgraded the CPU once in the past. AMD had very good compatibility on am4. I only needed to upgrade the bios.
RAM requirements and expectations have historically increased very rapidly. It wasn’t too long ago that 16 GB was considered questionably excessive, and is now considered the minimum to run modern games (or run several Electron apps simultaneously). A basic developer workstation probably starts at 32 GB these days, with option for expansion to 256 GB or more. I would not have much use for 256 GB of RAM today but in 5-10 years I probably will.
This Lobsters cohort is going to naturally be an exception to this.
But if we take a step back and think about the average consumer, it’s just not happening. I’d say >99% of MacBooks, for example, are never upgraded.
And of course Strix Halo is in the early adopter part of the adoption curve now. So I recognize the mismatch between the current consumer, who are technical enthusiasts. But as it commoditizes, that’ll shift.
For now, I as an early adopter/enthusiast, definitely want performance over upgrade ability. But I acknowledge others may not see it the same way.
Yeah. This is due to technical constrains in the specifics of the AMD CPU/GPU/chipset.
In the LTT video[1] someone from the company said they “Asked AMD” about replaceable memory and AMD came back and said due to “signal integrity […] over the 256-bit bus” it isn’t possible.
(Check out the clip. Starts at 7:25).
Some way to expand the system with something faster than an normal SSD? Hell, I suppose slower DRAM to act as a ram disk would be good enough, if the chip set could drive both. PCIe connected ram disk maybe?
Some way to expand the system with something faster than an normal SSD? Hell, I suppose slower DRAM to act as a ram disk would be good enough
You’re missing the point entirely.
The problem that’s being solved by Framework is not “expanding the system with something faster than an SSD”. It’s “expanding the system with something faster than DDR5”.
My experience with trying to keep machines from become obsolete suggests that the ability to add any extra RAM - or something nearly equivalent - is perhaps more important than its speed. Admittedly though I am an old git and maybe my use cases are out of date.
Personally a machine with soldered down very fast RAM with an option to add a “faster than SSD” ram disk for use as swap later on seems like it would remain useful for longer than a machine without that option. But my machines tend to get used as conventional servers or build farms, maybe other uses cases that I’m not thinking about would not benefit as much.
The entire subthread begins with your assertion that something faster than SSD (but slower than DRAM) “would be the answer here”, where “here” is a demand for a type of extremely fast DRAM that uses a 256-bit wide bus (i.e., several times more than regular DDRx SDRAM).
If I’m “missing your point”, then it means you have changed your point mid-conversation, which is not a valid way of debating anything.
So… buy a less repairable, no standards-based desktop instead of building your own modular standardized one where you can pick and choose components from hundreds of companies. This really doesn’t seem like the Framework way.
So… buy a less repairable, no standards-based desktop instead of building your own modular standardized one where you can pick and choose components from hundreds of companies
I think it’s simply not intended for enthusiasts who build their PCs from scratch. It’s rather intended for people who would have instead bought a prebuilt (from a certain fruit company, perhaps) and never stuck their noses beyond the warranty sticker.
It’s just a different audience. There is no problem in having both at the same time.
Right up until getting the second audience costs you the first one. Look around the comments on this story and you can just smell the bridges burning …
It’s also built for people who want an x86-64 alternative to Apple silicon. That needs a few things. Unified memory, maximum bandwidth, and plenty of G+N CUs.
I want this myself (although I love Apple silicon too). At the point the 395 Max starts to actually become reasonably available, I all over it. Give me soldered memory please. I’m fine paying for that to be maxed out from the start.
This is an odd direction to take. The PC market is completely commoditized.
I guess all gamers have towers, and I suppose a certain segment of “gamers” are into branded hardware, but when I was gaming with my buddies no one had a branded desktop. We all bought parts here and there and put it together. That was part of the fun. In fact, I see that https://pcpartpicker.com/ is still around.
I haven’t had a tower in over a decade. I mean I have a tower. No one in the house has turned it on for about a decade since I gave up gaming.
I don’t want to split hairs too much, but I think that at that size for mini-ITX, you start getting into trickier builds at smaller sizes. Here we have the integrated GPU making it all a bit more straightforward. And the aesthetic bonus.
Like if you want to do a fun mini-ITX build with the discrete GPU, it gets kinda tough! At least that’s my read on things. This is a 4.5L case after all.
(My reply was mostly to just comment on the fact that I think there’s a market)
Is tiny box a brand? Or do you mean that there is a niche for small form factor PCs? I think the niche for small form factor is fanless, somewhat stylish or unobtrusive media servers with SSD storage that people can keep in their living rooms. In any case, there are many of all forms.
Framework’s differentiator was “We sell repairable laptops.” This weird foray into desktops has no differentiating power.
There’s a niche for small form factor PCs that still have enough juice to do stuff beyond just being a media server (go check out reddit r/sffpc for a bunch of pics).
I do agree about Framework not being able to lean into its differentiator here is, well, not great. They could try to sell something leaning into that! And I do tend to agree about the repairability arguments.
Seems they are selling though, so I don’t know if you can say this won’t be successful. I hope that any future iterations figure out the (legit!) memory + bandwidth + replacability difficulties.
Maybe I don’t understand something, but replaceable memory isn’t important to me at all. It’s not like batteries and storage devices (which degrade over time) – memory that leaves the factory in non-defective shape will pretty much never fail. And yeah, you might want to increase it in a few years, but my guess is that when you’re ready to upgrade the RAM, it will probably also be about time for a cpu upgrade.
Having the two coupled doesn’t seem like an issue to me.
That said, Framework Computer, Inc. is a for-profit corporation like all the others. Everything it has ever said about waste-reduction or principles – or AI – was and is shameless marketing. It will say whatever it thinks will get it into your bed.
Across the entire fleet, 1.3% of machines are affected by uncorrectable errors per year, with some platforms seeing as many as 2-4% affected.
In the systems we study, all uncorrectable errors are considered serious enough to shut down the machine
and replace the DIMM at fault.
In my experience, because failing RAM generally just causes application or system crashes (as opposed to a completely non-working machine like a dead battery or dead storage), people are more likely to blame software or other hardware components for the issue, not their RAM.
Thanks for this! I no longer know where I first heard the “memory doesn’t degrade” claim, but I’ve heard it repeated enough from smart people that I’ve started repeating it myself.
Without getting to deeply into it, that paper appears to claim that socketed memory does degrade with age. I have some immediate concerns about the study, including that it looks like it was published around 2008-9 (judging by the age charts). I don’t know how relevant that still is today.
There are multiple papers investigating DRAM failures I found that I did not mention in my previous comment. I did not find any that support the idea that “memory doesn’t degrade”.
I could tell you relevant anecdotes from my technical support days about Memtest and the differing outcomes for old iBooks depending on whether their failing RAM was soldered to their logic board or installed in the board’s expansion slot, but I think a paper involving orders of magnitude of more computers than I ever fixed (i.e. “the majority of machines in Google’s fleet … from January 2006 to June 2008”) should be more convincing.
the modular ports system where you can remove them by pulling from the outside always seemed goofy. it sacrifices air circulation and I have to assume they are not as sturdy as something screwed in. but then to bring it to the desktop where there is already room for a PCIe bracket? amazing…
I like not having to get out a screwdriver to hotswap my ports. I don’t think I’ve ever had sturdiness issues; there’s a mechanical latch and a button you have to hold in in order to pull them out.
but wouldn’t you rather just have more ports and not have to hotswap them? the latch and button and guide rails and expansion card housing obviously take up space in the case that could be used for more ports. maybe there are cases where the tradeoff is worth it but it strikes me as a pointless gimmick.
I’m surprised by the 12-inch version. I’ve been reluctant to get a Framework laptop because the 13 seemed too small and the 16 too big. I was sort of hoping they’d introduce a third size but didn’t expect it to be even smaller. I guess the 2-in-1 feature is the important thing, not the size.
Not interested in the desktop or AI stuff and assume it’s an appeal to investors rather than customers.
More positively I think their previous products look great and I hope they keep improving them.
What are the token/sec estimates for 70Gbs+ LLM models with this machine?
I have no LLM background, but to me it feels it’s like 2t/s, which is not enough to comfortably use them. So this machine would be for developing and hobbying, but not a democratization of LLMs.
Maybe one could run several ~30Gb models in parallel, but that’s it.
Does anybody that use local LLMs have a better estimate? I’m curious to know.
bezdomni
14 days ago
Really disappointing that CPU and RAM are soldered on, especially in a desktop. I understand there were difficulties but the answer is “don’t build the shitty thing”, not “couldn’t find a way of making it not shitty”.
Yeah I definitely agree. The right call would’ve been to not release this, even if I understand it’s very tempting for them.
It’s sad because now they’re bringing problems they set out to solve in laptops to the desktop space. It’s a bit backwards. Hopefully this isn’t a sign of them straying further from the goal.
If these boards are proven to be reliable then this concept could still lead to less e-waste given that it’s just a single board.
But it’s a huge if. And it could seriously backfire if frequent replacements are needed.
The tradeoffs are reasonable, IMO - shared VRAM/RAM is a really powerful feature.
From an engineering perspective, perhaps.
From a trust, values, and brand protection perspective: not at all.
It’s not a question of “engineering perspective” vs “trust, values, and brand protection”. It’s a necessity to realize the desired level of performance (which is desired by a non-insignificant amount of people, see also: democratization of AI).
To bring an analogy, if you’re building a car, the practical necessity for said car to have 4 wheels has higher priority than dislike of wheels as a concept. The other way lies
madnessFSF and their endorsement of 802.11n NICs in 2025.No-one told Framework they had to build a car, though! If it’s not currently possible to build an AI optimised machine without compromising on their principles, then … don’t.
You are missing the forest for the trees.
The principles of Framework is to build things that are more repairable than their competitors. Without Framework, a user who wants a workstation built on an energy-efficient, GPU-capable, highly memory-optimized SoC has no options other than Apple and maybe some NUC-style prebuilts (thus, no repairable/upgradeable options at all). With Framework, there now is a repairable option, even if it’s less repairable than some would want.
In what world is this a net negative?
I think the difference in our opinions might be over just whether such a “highly memory optimised SoC” is Right or Wrong.
I think what Framework has built is Good and Wrong. Hence my claim that it’s bad from a brand perspective.
Sample data of only myself, but, I’ve gone from being quite an evangelist for Framework to seeing them as just another box maker. The horns effect (opposite of the halo effect) from association with AI probably doesn’t help either. Feels very bandwagony.
My personal take is that both are important to have around and it’s unlikely that people as committed to the bit as FSF folks would even buy something from Framework. Maybe I’ve misjudged the target audience though.
Possibly?
I’m not one of the “FSF folks” for a variety of reasons; I bought my wife and I each a Framework laptop, because I greatly value modularity and repairability.
As personal computing hardware becomes ever more appliance-like and user hostile, it was a delight to find a company with values similar to mine, and products to match.
But, surprise! Looks like the allure of hopping on the AI gravy train was too strong. Seems Framework is content to be a shitbox manufacturer who just happens to have some decent models in their lineup.
That’s exactly what I was trying to convey.
[Comment removed by author]
That’s not my analogy, that’s a different analogy that happens to use the same metaphor. Unfortunately, this analogy seems unsound, since tyres (and, to a lesser extent, rims) are a consumable item, unlike CPU and RAM.
I posted my take on this question somewhere downthread.
Framework made a PC that generates e-waste and “AI” slop. Lol.
So having made that trade-off, what differentiates them from any other straight-to-landfill consumer appliance manufacturer?
This is such a tone-deaf move. I’d worried about them abandoning their principles once they grew, it never occurred to me that they’d start selling shit like this so early in the piece.
From a company whose whole ethos is “less e-waste” they made a thing that adds to said e-waste.. Absolutely ridiculous.
At a glance, they have a very good reason for doing this. Shared RAM with a humongous bus to the SoC is the only way to compete with, e.g., Apple Silicon.
Framework isn’t supposed to be competing with Apple Silicon by building better Apple Silicon; they’re supposed to be offering an alternative to the consumer appliance / landfill model.
I think they might ultimately have the last word about who exactly they’re supposed to compete with. :)
Well, yes :) But that’s the messaging they’ve run with to date, and attracted a lot of quite vocal supporters along the way. This move might lose a bunch of them; we’ll see.
I think about something like the RasPi with closed source firmware blobs on some components, where they can build something that makes some improvements, and then continue to push the boundaries as time goes on.
I do agree with the sentiment regarding a desktop in particular. I’m looking at this more like a giant NUC but it’s odd positioning! The only sort of side note is at least given the form factor the machine will likely last way longer than laptops do with all their random issues due to their usage patterns.
You kill performance if you force the CPU to communicate with the RAM over a socketed connection.
That’s why Apple Silicon puts CPU, GPU and RAM into the same package, so that there can be a super high bandwidth connection between memory and processing units.
That’s also why high end discrete GPUs use HBM (high bandwidth memory) in the same package as the GPU.
Yes. My point wasn’t to rail against physics, it was to rail against Framework adding this to their product line.
Framework also sells a discrete GPU, an AMD Radeon™ RX 7700S for $550. It has 8GB of GDDR6 RAM that is soldered in, again for performance reasons.
The tragedy of the Framework 16 is that you get to choose between an integrated GPU that has slow access to socketed main memory, or you can use the discrete GPU, which has fast soldered local memory, but then it’s very slow to transfer data between CPU memory and GPU memory. You have two GPUs, but both suffer from performance compromises.
I would like to see a Framework 16 mainboard that has the same architecture as the new desktop mainboard. A high performance GPU and a high performance CPU, both sharing the same high performance memory (aka integrated memory). This would seem to require soldered RAM, or RAM inside an integrated CPU/GPU SOC package.
People who want this kind of high performance architecture in a laptop currently buy macbooks. But it would be nice if Framework were to offer this too.
The Framework desktop has this architecture, so I see it as a step in the right direction.
The difference in memory bandwidth isn’t that high anymore. The M processors had an edge when desktop CPUs were still at DDR4, but with DDR5 you get around 100GB/s (dual channel). The current M4 has a memory bandwidth of 120GB/s. The M4 Pro has 273GB/s, M4 Max has 410GB/s and M2 Ultra has 800GB/s, for transparency, but they are at another pricepoint where you can just as well build a threadripper or even EPYC workstation with up to 700+ GB/s memory bandwidth and orders of magnitude more RAM (Apple charges a lot for RAM and storage).
There still are other advantages of the M processors (latency, etc.) which can’t be beaten without a SoC approach, but the flexibility gained with building your own system is still a more important matter to me personally. There’s also DDR6 on the horizon, but nothing stops Apple from using it as well in their chips. Just as well, nothing stops AMD or Intel from increasing the number of memory channels.
By comparison, the LPDDR5x in the new desktop board has 273 GB/s of bandwidth. So that is a big difference over socketed memory.
Having owned a Framework since April of 2022, I cannot recommend them to people who need even basic durability in their devices. Since then, I have done two mainboard replacements, two top cover replacements, a hinge replacement, a battery replacement, several glue jobs after the captive screw hubs sheared from the plastic backing…
It’s just such an absurdly fragile device with incredibly poor thermals. They sacrificed a ton of desirable features to make the laptop repairable, but ultimately have released a set of devices that, when used in real-world settings, end with you repairing the device more often than not. And these repairs are often non-trivial.
I will personally be migrating to another machine. The Framework 12’s focus on durability may be trending in the right direction, but to regain trust, I’d need to see things like drop and wear tests. A laptop that can be repaired, but needs constant upkeep/incredibly delicate handling, is ultimately not an actual consumer device, but a hobbyist device.
Maybe they’ll get better in a few years. Maybe the Framework 12 will be better. Their new focus on AI, the soldered RAM in the desktop offering, and the failure to address the flimsy plastic chassis innards, among other things, mean that they have a long way to go.
It’s definitely a “be part of the community that helps solve our product problems” sort of feeling.
I have an AMD FW13, and was trying to figure out why it loses 50+% of its battery charge overnight when I close the lid, because I don’t use this computer every single day and don’t want to have remember to charge yet another device.
So I check the basics-I’m running their officially supported Linux distro, BIOS is current, etc. And half an hour into reading forum threads about diagnosing sleep power draw, I realize that this is not how I want to spend my time on this planet. I love that they’re trying to build repairable/upgradeable devices, but that goal doesn’t matter so much if people end up ditching your products for another option because they’re just tired of trying to fix it.
I’ll chime in with the opposite experience - I’ve owned an AMD Framework 13 since it came out, and had no durability issues with it whatsoever, and it’s been one of my 2 favorite computers I’ve ever owned. I’ve done one main board replacement that saved my butt after a bottle of gin fell over on top of it in transport.
Development and light gaming (on Linux, I very much appreciate their Linux support) have been great, and the reparability both gives me peace of mind, an upgrade path, and has already saved me quite a bit of money.
I’ve owned a framework since Batch 1. Durability has not been a problem for me. My original screen has a small chip in it from when I put it in a bag with something that had sharp edges and pressured the screen for a whole flight. Slowly growing. Otherwise, it’s been solid.
Same. I have a batch 1. There are quirks, which I expected and knew I am supporting a startup with little experience. I since have upgraded and put my old board into a cooler master case. This is so amazing, and what I cared about. I am still super happy with having bought the Framework and particular for tinkerers and people who will have a use for their old mainboards it’s amazing.
I get harbouring resentment for a company you felt sold then a bad product. But at the same time, you bought a laptop from a very inexperienced company which was brand new at making laptops, a pretty difficult product category to get right when you’re not just re-branding someone else’s white-label hardware.
3 years have passed since then, if I were in the market for a category which Framework competes in these days I would be inclined to look at more recent reviews and customer testimonials. I don’t think flaws in that 3 year old hardware is that relevant anymore. Not because 3 years is a particularly long time in the computer hardware business, but because it’s a really long time relative to the short life of this particular company.
I would agree that 3 years is enough time for a company to use their production lessons to improve their product. But nothing has changed in the Framework 13.
I don’t resent Framework. I think that’s putting words in my mouth. I just cannot, in good faith, recommend their products to people who need even a semi-durable machine. That’s just fact.
Founded by people who had experience designing laptops already, and manufactured by a company that manufactures many laptops. Poor explanations for the problems, IMO.
I’ve had a 12th gen Intel since Sept 2022 (running NixOS btw) and I have not had any issues, I will admit it sits in one place 99% of the time. I might order the replacement hinge since mine is a bit floppy but not too big a deal.
As for the event, I was hoping for a minipc using the 395 and I got my wish. Bit pricey and not small enough for where I want to put it and I have no plans for AI work so it’s probably not the right machine for me.
I was originally interested in the HP machine coming with the same CPU (which should be small enough to fit) but I’ve been pricing an AMD 9950 and it comes out cheaper. I was also disappointed there wasn’t a sku with 385 Max w/64GB of RAM , which I might have have ordered to keep the cost down.
For reference a new machine is intended to replace a 10 year old Devils Canyon system.
I’ve also had my Framework 13 since beginning of 2022. I’ve had to do a hinge replacement, input cover replacement, and mainboard replacement. But I sort of expected that since it’s a young company and hardware is hard. And through all of it support was very responsive and helpful.
I would expect that nowadays the laptops are probably more solidly built than those early batches!
Support was definitely helpful. I just don’t have time or money to replace parts on my machine anymore.
From what I understand, the laptops aren’t any stronger. Even the Framework 16 just got some aftermarket/post-launch foam pads to put below the keyboard to alleviate the strain on the keyboard. The entire keyboard deck would flex.
The fact that these products have these flaws makes me wonder how Framework organizes its engineering priorities.
When compared to other similar laptops from brands like HP or Lenovo, how does the deck flex compare? I definitely feel sympathetic to not being better or on par with Apple - given the heaps of money Apple has for economies of scale + lots of mechanical engineers, but it would be a bit rough if mid-tier laptops in that category were far superior.
The deck flex is on par with or worse than an HP EliteBook circa 2019. The problem is that it’s incredibly easy to bend the entire frame of the machine, to the point where it interferes with the touchpad’s ability to click.
It’s really bad, bordering on unexcusable. The fact that there’s no concrete reinforcment says that they sacrificed build quality for repairability, which is equivalent to making a leaky boat with a very fast bilge pump.
I’m not sure what you’re doing to your laptop; how are you bending the entire frame of the machine?
It’s a new company that is largely doing right by open source, and especially open hardware. The quality isn’t incredible but it is worth its value, and I find these claims you’re making dubious.
It’s a fairly common flex point for the chassis, and a common support problem. The base of the mousepad, towards the front of the laptop where there’s a depression in the case, is where the majority of the flex is.
My laptop has seen nothing but daily, regular use. You can find the claims dubious, but others are having them too.
This has been my experience with the Framework. It’s not Apple hardware, which is best in class all around, but it is on-par with my Dell XPS.
I’ll chime in too: I’ve had the Framework 13 AMD since it came out (mid 2023) and it has been great.
I upgraded the display after the new 2.8K panel came out, it took 2 minutes. Couple months later it developed some dead pixels, so they sent me a replacement. In the process of swapping it out, I accidentally tore the display cable. It took me a while to notice/debug it, but in the end it was just a $15 cable replacement that I’m fairly sure would have otherwise resulted in a full mainboard replacement for any other laptop. (When I had Macbooks, I lost count how many times Apple replaced the mainboard for the smallest thing.)
I haven’t been too precious with it, I toss it around like I did my Thinkpad before this. There’s some scuffs but it has been fine, perhaps the newer models are more sturdy? It’s comforting to know that if anything breaks, I’ll be able to fix it.
I also run NixOS on it, it does everything I need it to do, the battery life is great (8-10 hours of moderate use) and I’ll happily swap out the battery in a few more years once it starts losing capacity.
I spend so much of my life at the computer that feeling a sense of ownership over the components makes a lot of sense to me. I don’t want to feel like I’m living in a hotel.
It is, in fact, how I want to spend my time on this planet.
To add to the chorus, I bought a 12th gen intel framework 13 on release and it’s been flawless so far. Nixos worked out of the box. I love the 3:2 screen. I can totally believe that a small/young manufacturing company has quality control issues and some people are getting lemons, but the design itself seems solid to me.
On my old dell laptop I snapped all the usb ports on one side (by lifting up the other side while keyboard/mouse were still connected). Since they’re connected directly to the motherboard they weren’t repairable without buying a new cpu. If I did the same on the framework it would only break the $12 expansion cards and I wouldn’t even have to turn it off to replace them.
Later I dropped that same dell about 20cm on to a couch with the screen open. The impact swung the screen open all the way and snapped the hinges. They wanted me to send it back for repairs but I couldn’t handle the downtime, so for a year I just had the hinges duck-taped together. I’ve dropped my framework the same way, but because the screen opens the full 180 degrees it doesn’t leverage the hinges at all. And if it did break I’d be able to ship the part and replace it myself.
Not that I support the desktop offering as anything but waste, but the soldered RAM is apparently all about throughput:
With the focus of the desktop being “AI applications” that prioritize high throughpout, I’d say they could’ve gone with an entirely different chip.
I get the engineering constraint, but the reason for the constraint is something I disagree with.
Who else is making something competitive?
I wish I could name something in good faith that was comparable to a hyper-repairable x86-64 laptop. Lenovo is pivoting towards repairability with the T14 Gen 5, but I can’t recommend that either yet.
Star Labs, System76, some old Thinkpad models.. there are “competitive” things, but few things that pitch the things Framework does.
While I agree on some of that, I must stress that I’ve had hardware that was fine until just one thing suddenly broke and everything was unusable. I’ll try an analogy: with repairability, if all your components are 99% reliable and working, the whole machine is at 99% but without it, even if all of them are at 99.9% instead, when you have 10 components, you’re not in a better situation overall.
And I say that while I need to finish going through support for a mainboard replacement due to fried USB ports on a first-gen machine (although not an initial batch). BTW, funnily I’m wondering if there’s an interaction with my yubikey. I also wish the chassis was a bit sturdier but that’s more of a wish.
As for thermals, while I think they could probably be better, the 11th gen Intel CPU that you have (just like I do) isn’t great at all: 13th gen ones are much better AFAIK.
I’ve experienced a full main board failure which led to me upgrading to a 12th gen on my own dime.
The thermal problems are still there, and their fans have some surprising QA problems that are exacerbated by thermal issues.
I wish I could excuse the fact that my machine feels like it’s going to explode even with power management. The fans grind after three replacements now, and I lack the energy and motivation to do a fourth.
I think 12th gen is pretty similar to 11th gen. I contemplated the upgrade for similar reasons but held off because I didn’t need to know and the gains seemed low. IIRC it’s really with 13th gen that Intel improved the CPUs. But I agree the thermals/power seems sub-par; I feel like it could definitely be better.
BTW, I just “remembered” that I use mine mostly on my desk and it’s not directly sitting on it which greatly improves its cooling (I can’t give hard numbers but I see the temps under load are better and max CPU frequency can be maintained).
Sorry to hear about the trouble with your Framework 13. To offer another data point: I have a 12th gen Framework 13 and haven’t needed to repair a thing, I’m still super happy with it. The frame-bending I’ve also not seen, it’s a super sturdy device for me.
I can second that. I’ve had a 12th gen Intel system since late 2022 and no issues of the sort. Even dropping it once did nothing to it
People keep complaining about that soldered RAM and CPU, but as a counterpoint - I don’t care. I usually buy my PCs in a maxed out configuration, and then just ride them / give away until they are really useless, and do not really make upgrades. It’s a downside, sure, but not a big one.
I also really enjoy small form yet powerful and quiet PCs. I have a custom one built (4th or 5th in 2 decades), and took some effort to match and find the parts, assemble. Framework Desktop in comparison seems way better integrated (stuff fit inside better), and the pricing is really good. I could recommend it to someone that just wants a well made PC and is not a tech enthusiast, I could buy it myself to save time and risk.
Were it any other company, i wouldnt care either. But this is company whose whole ethos was going against this kind of thing.
Well, joke’s on me for trusting a company, I guess.
Yeah, me too. One day I’ll learn …
Yeah, exactly this. With even the base specs on this beast you’ll be fine until no compatible upgrade parts would have been available anymore anyway
I don’t understand the necessity for a Framework Desktop edition. It’s just more waste. Just make a better laptop or sell it headless. It would also be nice to see consistency in the offerings instead of 12 being Intel, 13 being AMD AI thingy, 16 being last-gen AMD etc.
I don’t know what “waste” means here. I also don’t understand what the significant difference is in your mind between a “headless laptop” and a “desktop with laptop components”. Are you complaining that the desktop doesn’t come with worse cooling and a built-in keyboard?
The way I see it, if Framework has the capacity to build and sell a desktop computer, and they expect it to sell well enough to cover costs, it’s not hurting anything. For a small company there’s always the risk of spreading yourself too thin, but I don’t think any of us have enough insight into their operations to tell if that’s happening here.
When I say a headless laptop I mean it literally, as in a Framework 13 with some nubs on the hinge or just a plastic block instead of a screen assembly. No keyboard either, make a keyboard-slot-shaped fan assembly for cooling or something - they’re smart people, they could figure it out. The only thing weird about it would be the form factor not being the box shape desktop users are used to. I am making the complaint you’re trying to dismiss. “Waste” is more plastic crap and manufacturing supply chain crap, from moulds to energy usage to time expenditure.
You can already have headless ones. I think there’s even a case on their shop.
edit: As for the variety in CPUs, I think they started with intel partly because TB4 but then they started a partnership with AMD (and AMD CPUs are definitely in a better position now). Moreover, I’ve seen much more variety with other manufacturers (to a point that’s maddening tbh). Finally, the “AMD AI” is AMD’s marketing name: just ignore that part of the name.
I’m a little sad that CPU and RAM are soldered on. They claim they were unable to find a modular solution without sacrificing performance. Interested into seeing some reviews soon.
I’ll always choose the bandwidth and performance over socketed components. Truth is, many people want socketed components, but then never do anything with it. In fact, the vast majority of PC owners follow this. It’s a small portion of enthusiasts who might upgrade.
Still. Performance please.
A lot of people upgrade RAM. CPU, ehhh much less often; that usually entails upgrading the motherboard anyway.
If you think about it a bit, it really doesn’t make as much sense as it could seem to make at first. Who, exactly, upgrades RAM? Broadly, I know two categories of people: laptop owners and people who lack enough funds to build a workstation to their liking at once (so they end up buying less RAM than they wanted, with the intent to buy the rest in future).
Upgrading RAM in a laptop is somewhat of a self-inflicted pain: many laptops are sold with woefully inadequate RAM, and sticking more RAM into an already owned laptop is one of the very few ways to delay the obsolescence of a given hardware platform. This is not a problem here.
Framework is not a cheap vendor, not even a cost-effective one. This automatically self-selects for people who do have enough funds to purchase a workstation to their preferred spec. So, again, not a problem here.
Anything I’ve missed?
I had ram failure that would cause weird errors on my T480s. Luckily it was the external ram that failed and not the soldered one or else my laptop wouldve been e-waste. Now 5 years in, it’s still running extremely smoothly.
I have just bought more ram for my work machine which is about 1 year old. I switched from python to android development which is much more memory hungry due to emulators and large IDEs. So I’m upgrading from 32 to 64 gigs.
I have also upgraded the CPU once in the past. AMD had very good compatibility on am4. I only needed to upgrade the bios.
RAM requirements and expectations have historically increased very rapidly. It wasn’t too long ago that 16 GB was considered questionably excessive, and is now considered the minimum to run modern games (or run several Electron apps simultaneously). A basic developer workstation probably starts at 32 GB these days, with option for expansion to 256 GB or more. I would not have much use for 256 GB of RAM today but in 5-10 years I probably will.
A lot more people don’t.
This Lobsters cohort is going to naturally be an exception to this.
But if we take a step back and think about the average consumer, it’s just not happening. I’d say >99% of MacBooks, for example, are never upgraded.
And of course Strix Halo is in the early adopter part of the adoption curve now. So I recognize the mismatch between the current consumer, who are technical enthusiasts. But as it commoditizes, that’ll shift.
For now, I as an early adopter/enthusiast, definitely want performance over upgrade ability. But I acknowledge others may not see it the same way.
Yeah. This is due to technical constrains in the specifics of the AMD CPU/GPU/chipset.
In the LTT video[1] someone from the company said they “Asked AMD” about replaceable memory and AMD came back and said due to “signal integrity […] over the 256-bit bus” it isn’t possible.
(Check out the clip. Starts at 7:25).
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lErGZZgUbY&t=447
Edit: that “someone from the company” is Nirav Patel, the CEO of Framework
I’m half seriously thinking that a socket you could stick something Optane-like in for superfast swap / cache would be the answer here :)
How is Optane, which is slower than DRAM, the answer to something where even “regular” DDR5 RAM isn’t fast enough?
Some way to expand the system with something faster than an normal SSD? Hell, I suppose slower DRAM to act as a ram disk would be good enough, if the chip set could drive both. PCIe connected ram disk maybe?
You’re missing the point entirely.
The problem that’s being solved by Framework is not “expanding the system with something faster than an SSD”. It’s “expanding the system with something faster than DDR5”.
I think you’re missing mine, actually.
My experience with trying to keep machines from become obsolete suggests that the ability to add any extra RAM - or something nearly equivalent - is perhaps more important than its speed. Admittedly though I am an old git and maybe my use cases are out of date.
Personally a machine with soldered down very fast RAM with an option to add a “faster than SSD” ram disk for use as swap later on seems like it would remain useful for longer than a machine without that option. But my machines tend to get used as conventional servers or build farms, maybe other uses cases that I’m not thinking about would not benefit as much.
The entire subthread begins with your assertion that something faster than SSD (but slower than DRAM) “would be the answer here”, where “here” is a demand for a type of extremely fast DRAM that uses a 256-bit wide bus (i.e., several times more than regular DDRx SDRAM).
If I’m “missing your point”, then it means you have changed your point mid-conversation, which is not a valid way of debating anything.
We might be able to get top-spec socketed RAM again once CAMM2 gets enough penetration, or this could just be the way things are in the future.
So… buy a less repairable, no standards-based desktop instead of building your own modular standardized one where you can pick and choose components from hundreds of companies. This really doesn’t seem like the Framework way.
I think it’s simply not intended for enthusiasts who build their PCs from scratch. It’s rather intended for people who would have instead bought a prebuilt (from a certain fruit company, perhaps) and never stuck their noses beyond the warranty sticker.
It’s just a different audience. There is no problem in having both at the same time.
Right up until getting the second audience costs you the first one. Look around the comments on this story and you can just smell the bridges burning …
Partially, sure.
It’s also built for people who want an x86-64 alternative to Apple silicon. That needs a few things. Unified memory, maximum bandwidth, and plenty of G+N CUs.
I want this myself (although I love Apple silicon too). At the point the 395 Max starts to actually become reasonably available, I all over it. Give me soldered memory please. I’m fine paying for that to be maxed out from the start.
Do folks know if the Ryzen AI chips in the Framework 13 are actually suitable for running LLMs locally or is it just marketing buzzwords?
I was under the possibly mistaken impression that you needed like, a dedicated GPU for any reasonable performance.
It’s just a marketing rebrand for laptop Zen 5 chips, not that it really does AI better
This is an odd direction to take. The PC market is completely commoditized.
I guess all gamers have towers, and I suppose a certain segment of “gamers” are into branded hardware, but when I was gaming with my buddies no one had a branded desktop. We all bought parts here and there and put it together. That was part of the fun. In fact, I see that https://pcpartpicker.com/ is still around.
I haven’t had a tower in over a decade. I mean I have a tower. No one in the house has turned it on for about a decade since I gave up gaming.
tiny box is its own market. Take a look at how small that box is.
Yeah totally unlike NUC’s or other mini-ITX systems /s
Those mini-ITX systems tend to also use discrete CPU’s and memory, from some browsing of newegg.
I don’t want to split hairs too much, but I think that at that size for mini-ITX, you start getting into trickier builds at smaller sizes. Here we have the integrated GPU making it all a bit more straightforward. And the aesthetic bonus.
Like if you want to do a fun mini-ITX build with the discrete GPU, it gets kinda tough! At least that’s my read on things. This is a 4.5L case after all.
(My reply was mostly to just comment on the fact that I think there’s a market)
Is tiny box a brand? Or do you mean that there is a niche for small form factor PCs? I think the niche for small form factor is fanless, somewhat stylish or unobtrusive media servers with SSD storage that people can keep in their living rooms. In any case, there are many of all forms.
Framework’s differentiator was “We sell repairable laptops.” This weird foray into desktops has no differentiating power.
There’s a niche for small form factor PCs that still have enough juice to do stuff beyond just being a media server (go check out reddit r/sffpc for a bunch of pics).
I do agree about Framework not being able to lean into its differentiator here is, well, not great. They could try to sell something leaning into that! And I do tend to agree about the repairability arguments.
Seems they are selling though, so I don’t know if you can say this won’t be successful. I hope that any future iterations figure out the (legit!) memory + bandwidth + replacability difficulties.
Maybe I don’t understand something, but replaceable memory isn’t important to me at all. It’s not like batteries and storage devices (which degrade over time) – memory that leaves the factory in non-defective shape will pretty much never fail. And yeah, you might want to increase it in a few years, but my guess is that when you’re ready to upgrade the RAM, it will probably also be about time for a cpu upgrade.
Having the two coupled doesn’t seem like an issue to me.
That said, Framework Computer, Inc. is a for-profit corporation like all the others. Everything it has ever said about waste-reduction or principles – or AI – was and is shameless marketing. It will say whatever it thinks will get it into your bed.
Do you have a source for this?
DRAM Errors in the Wild: A Large-Scale Field Study looked at errors in Google servers over multiple years:
In my experience, because failing RAM generally just causes application or system crashes (as opposed to a completely non-working machine like a dead battery or dead storage), people are more likely to blame software or other hardware components for the issue, not their RAM.
Thanks for this! I no longer know where I first heard the “memory doesn’t degrade” claim, but I’ve heard it repeated enough from smart people that I’ve started repeating it myself.
Without getting to deeply into it, that paper appears to claim that socketed memory does degrade with age. I have some immediate concerns about the study, including that it looks like it was published around 2008-9 (judging by the age charts). I don’t know how relevant that still is today.
I could have been wrong about this!
There are multiple papers investigating DRAM failures I found that I did not mention in my previous comment. I did not find any that support the idea that “memory doesn’t degrade”.
I could tell you relevant anecdotes from my technical support days about Memtest and the differing outcomes for old iBooks depending on whether their failing RAM was soldered to their logic board or installed in the board’s expansion slot, but I think a paper involving orders of magnitude of more computers than I ever fixed (i.e. “the majority of machines in Google’s fleet … from January 2006 to June 2008”) should be more convincing.
agreed, i don’t get the need to upgrade the ram, especially when ram speed is dependent on the cpu anyway.
Previously
the modular ports system where you can remove them by pulling from the outside always seemed goofy. it sacrifices air circulation and I have to assume they are not as sturdy as something screwed in. but then to bring it to the desktop where there is already room for a PCIe bracket? amazing…
I like not having to get out a screwdriver to hotswap my ports. I don’t think I’ve ever had sturdiness issues; there’s a mechanical latch and a button you have to hold in in order to pull them out.
but wouldn’t you rather just have more ports and not have to hotswap them? the latch and button and guide rails and expansion card housing obviously take up space in the case that could be used for more ports. maybe there are cases where the tradeoff is worth it but it strikes me as a pointless gimmick.
I summon @calvin. I hope it doesn‘t feel like cheating. Btw I can‘t watch it today, so I count on you.
For any general usage, paying for that much ram speed while only getting x4 for GPU, kinda sucks!
For AI usage, the max memory AFAIK is still too low for heavy models.
Might be good for a super fast database server, but I’m confused what else this is to be for
I would really consider buying an 18” or at least 17” laptop from Framework, but they, sadly, do not exist.
Brief text post: https://frame.work/gb/en/blog/highlights-from-the-framework-2nd-gen-event
I’m surprised by the 12-inch version. I’ve been reluctant to get a Framework laptop because the 13 seemed too small and the 16 too big. I was sort of hoping they’d introduce a third size but didn’t expect it to be even smaller. I guess the 2-in-1 feature is the important thing, not the size.
Not interested in the desktop or AI stuff and assume it’s an appeal to investors rather than customers.
More positively I think their previous products look great and I hope they keep improving them.
What are the token/sec estimates for 70Gbs+ LLM models with this machine?
I have no LLM background, but to me it feels it’s like 2t/s, which is not enough to comfortably use them. So this machine would be for developing and hobbying, but not a democratization of LLMs.
Maybe one could run several ~30Gb models in parallel, but that’s it.
Does anybody that use local LLMs have a better estimate? I’m curious to know.