Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Framework Desktop is a beast

world.hey.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 464 posts

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#261

Post by esafak »

croes wrote: post #246
esafak wrote: post #206

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the purposes of running LLM models, a Mac Mini. The PC is cheaper, but it doesn't have MacOS, Apple's service or resale value.

> but it doesn't have MacOS, Apple's service or resale value. If the purpose is running LLMs non of that matters. But Linux support is an advantage. Does the M4 have that?

Why doesn't it matter? Does your computer magically stop needing to be serviced or eventually sold because you're running LLMs?

I run Linux containers all the time.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#262

Post by ozgrakkurt »

pengaru wrote: post #236
Kirth wrote: post #113

I was baffled by the comparison to the M4 Max. Does this mean that recent AMD chips will be performing at the same level, and what does that mean for on-device LLMs? .. or am I misunderstanding this whole ordeal?

It's not baffling once you realize TSMC is the main defining factor for all these chips, Apple Silicon is simply not that special in the grand scheme of things. Why do you think TSMC's production being in Taiwan is basically a national security issue for the U.S. at this point?

I don’t think there is a laptop that comes close to battery life or performance while on battery of m1 macbook pro

I hate apple but there is obviously something special about it

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#263

Post by christophilus »

ohdeargodno wrote: post #231
cuu508 wrote: post #177

What are more budget friendly options for similar workloads (running web app test suite in parallel)? My test suite currently runs in ~6 seconds on 9700K. Would be nice to speed it up, but maybe not for $2000 :-) Last I checked 13700K or 13900K looked like the price/performance sweet spot, but perhaps there are better options?

>My test suite currently runs in ~6 seconds on 9700K Absolutely nothing. 6 seconds is about the time it will take you to tab to your terminal, press up arrow, find your test task and run it. There's no amount of money that makes it go from 6 to 3, and no world in which there's any value to it. In addition, upgrading to a 13900K means you're playing the Intel Dance: sockets have (again) changed, in an (again) incompat…

It’s really nice to save and have your tests automatically run and go green (or red) nearly instantly. There is value to that. Performance matters.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#264

Post by wtallis »

sliken wrote: post #124
mixmastamyk wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was scoffing at HP, but then you got my attention with ECC RAM. Looks nice as well.

Keep scoffing, it's not real end to end ECC, just "link" ecc, which is just part of the chip -> CPU pipeline. So it's not full ECC like servers have with dimms with a multiple of 9 chips with ECC protecting everything from the dimms to the CPU. Keep in mind the ram is inside the strix halo package, not something HP has control over.

> Keep in mind the ram is inside the strix halo package, not something HP has control over.

It's not in the package, it's on the motherboard spread around the SoC package: https://www.hp.com/content/dam/sites/worldwide/personal-comp...

The 8 DRAM packages pretty clearly indicate you're not getting the extra capacity for end-to-end ECC as you would on a typical workstation or server memory module.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#265

Post by mixmastamyk »

einpoklum wrote: post #234

I don't really understand Why one should bother with the pluggable ports in something that's not a laptop. Even in 4.5L, shouldn't we just have "all the ports"? Also, this reminds me of "SkyReach Tiny": https://store.nfc-systems.com/products/skyreach-4-tiny an even smaller case, very versatile. No pluggable gimmicks though.

Only two on the front. So you get to decide what to put there. Also protects the port. Kind of a gimmick, but could be worse.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#266

Post by aesh2Xa1 »

vaylian wrote: post #213
paolomainardi wrote: post #174

Is there a real alternative, where is not not needed Windows in any way, to the Remote Device Management baked into firmware as Apple does with its hardware ? This is biggest missing to bring Linux to enterprises.

> the Remote Device Management baked into firmware as Apple does with its hardware? What do you mean? Linux had SSH (and before that rlogin) for a very long time already.

Apple devices support MDM. When you purchase the device, the device's firmware is configured to check in with an account owner. The firmware has an integrity feature such that this configuration cannot be removed by a user: https://it-training.apple.com/tutorials/deployment/dm005/

If OP just meant remote management through a BMC then that's not common except for server hardware, and it would have features like Redfish to configure the hardware itself. Apple devices don't have this.

You can also buy hardware to act as a remote keyboard/mouse/monitor and power button, and it supports systems whose motherboards have the right headers: https://pikvm.org/

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#267

Post by starkparker »

microtonal wrote: post #243
aomix wrote: post #227

I’ve been agonizing over getting the Framework Desktop for weeks as a dev machine/local LLM box/home server. It checks a lot of boxes but the only reason to look at the Framework Desktop over something like a Minisforum MS-A2 is for the LLM and that seems super janky right now. So I guess I’ll wait a beat and see where we are later in the year.

My main worry about all the Minisforum, Beelink, etc. PCs is: potential lack of UEFI firmware updates (does anyone have experience with how good they are with updates?) and potential backdoors in the UEFI firmware (either intentionally or unintentionally). A China-aligned/sponsored group has made an UEFI rootkit targetting ASUS/Gigabyte mainboards: https://www.spiceworks.com/it-security/vulnerability-managem... Why n…

As a Framework 13 owner, their firmware update history isn't that great either.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#268

Post by cmrdporcupine »

wmf wrote: post #244
lucb1e wrote: post #242

> The Framework Desktop with 64GB RAM + 2TB NVMe is $1,876. To get a Mac Studio with similar specs [...] you'll literally spend nearly twice as much [...] The Framework Desktop is simply a great deal. Wow, someone managed to beat Apple on price?? I don't know that it logically follows that anything is a great deal when it undercuts Apple. Half sounds about right -- I thought Apple was a bit more competitive these day…

That's purely due to Apple's ridiculous SSD pricing. You can save a lot of money by using an external SSD.

Don't forget how Apple rips you off on RAM. Always.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#270

Post by alt227 »

neuroelectron wrote: post #215

You know it would be a great use for this chip besides AI generative slop? A desktop server with AI-enhanced firewall and a silent home server. This could be effective for zero-days and other weird traffic patterns and maybe even add enterprise-ish email server with spam detection. There has been several projects started that are experimenting with this including Suricata and pfSense. I wonder how well this chip coul…

If you call what AI generates 'slop' then what do you think the quality of firewall rules it generates will be?

I dont think any enterprise is going to hand over the keys to its firewall any time soon.

Post reply on HN