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

291–300 of 464 posts

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#291

Post by throw554552 »

Fnoord wrote: post #237
makeitdouble wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For nuance: - framework only sells to specific countries. Warranty won't even be an issue if you can't buy one in the first place. - Chinese manufacturers offer support and warranty. In particular GMKTek does[0]. - Repairability will be at best on par with framework, but better than a random western brand. Think HP and their repairability track record. "just a Chinese company" feels pretty weird as a qualificative in…

My post is the nuance, and as a buyer/user of GPD, Minisforum, and Xiaomi products I respectfully disagree. Chinese companies are not on par with Western ones. The QA, safety measures, hazard compliance, warranty, or even proper English (they use an online translator service) isn't there. Cha bu duo is an accurate description of Chinese products. From the link you send they offer 7 days return policy. In EU you got 2…

> Cha bu duo is an accurate description of Chinese products.

Didn’t realize companies like DJI, BYD, CATL, Insta360, and Anker have a fail fast, fail early mentality.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#292

Post by nottorp »

reactordev wrote: post #219

>The AMD 395+ uses unified memory, like Apple, so nearly all of it is addressable to be used by the GPU. This is why they went with the “laptop” cpu. While it’s slightly slower than dedicated memory, it allows you to run the big models, at decent token speeds.

unified and soldered :(

I understand it's faster but still...

Did they at least do an internal PSU if they went the Apple way or does it come with a power brick twice the size of the case?

Edit: wait. They do have an internal PSU! Goodness!

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#293

Post by dijit »

scosman wrote: post #286
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…

He's comparing to a studio when he should compare to the mini for this performance. They are almost the same price at a 64gb RAM + 500gb storage config (CAD). - Framework, Max+ 64GB: $2,861.16 - Apple Mini M4 Pro, 64GB: $2,899.00 Apple does charge way too much for integrated storage, but Apple is only a 25% premium at 2TB not double (if you compare to the mini instead of the studio). Plug in a NVMe SSD if you're buil…

Not to defend Apple here, but it's also a bit apples to oranges (heh) because the power consumption is not easily comparable.

I would hazard a guess and say: at that spec, if you're looking at 1Y TCO, the Apple could easily be cost competitive performance per dollar.

Since they're in spitting distance of each other, just get the one you're most comfortable with. Personally I prefer Linux and I'm really happy that non-Apple machines are starting to get closer to the same efficiency and performance!

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#294

Post by 418tpot »

aeonik wrote: post #251
komali2 wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As stated previously, the sockets reduce signal integrity, which doesn't necessarily make them "bad," but is why Framework wasn't able to used socketed ram to maximize the potential of this CPU. This sort-of-interview of Nirav Patel (ceo of framework) explains in a bit more detail: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-lErGZZgUbY Basically, they need to use LPDDR5X memory, which isn't available in socketed form, because o…

They "why" hasn't been answered. I understand the previous statements very clearly. It makes intuitive sense to me, but I want to know more. Like physics PhD-level more.

I believe the reason is, at the frequencies these CPUs are talking to RAM, the reflection coefficient[1] starts playing a big role. This means any change in impedance in the wire cause reflections of the signal.

This is also the reasoning why you can't just have a dumb female to female HDMI coupling and expect video to work. All of such devices are active and read the stream on the input and relay them on the output.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflection_coefficient

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#295

Post by wtallis »

beeflet wrote: post #89
epistasis wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can see that objection too, and it seems far more reasonable than assuming that soldered RAM automatically means a reduced lifespan machine. But are Framework's RAM prices unreasonable? $400 for 64GB more of LPDDR5x seems OK. I haven't seen anybody object to Framework's RAM on those grounds.

With modular RAM, someone can buy old boards and RAM and use it for high-RAM applications down the line.

The workloads that people care most about today that need high RAM capacity are workloads that also need very high memory bandwidth. Old server hardware from eBay doesn't do a good job of satisfying the bandwidth side of things.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#297

Post by christophilus »

pragmatic wrote: post #195

[flagged]

This is the way I make my tech decisions. If a programmer says something I don’t like, especially about a domain completely unrelated to tech, I don’t use their stuff. That’s why I don’t use EMacs, rust, zig, Jai (whenever it’s released), go, JavaScript, neovim, or any OS I don’t personally build from assembly, any digital devices— I’m going to burn this iPhone when I’m done typing. That’ll show them.

It’s a tough life, but this way I don’t accidentally appear to support someone who is different from me.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#298

Post by MegaDeKay »

toasterlovin wrote: post #239
pengaru wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

> Apple Silicon is simply not that special in the grand scheme of things Apple Silicon might not be that special from an architecture perspective (although treating integrated GPUs as appropriate for workloads other than low end laptops was a break with industry trends), but it’s very special from an economic perspective. The Apple Silicon unit volumes from iPhones have financed TSMC’s rise to semiconductor process d…

Apple was just the highest bidder for getting the latest TSMC process. They wouldn't have had a problem getting other customers to buy up that capacity. And Intel's missteps counted for a substantial part of the process dominance you refer to. So I'd argue that Apple isn't that special here either.

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#299

Post by [deleted] »

heraldgeezer wrote: post #133

Not really. A laptop CPU defeats the purpose. Get a 9800X3D for gaming will be waaaay faster or Threadripper for productivity or the 9950X3D chips with 16 cores/32 threads. Why this laptop crap when you can get a nice PC case. Then again he thinks the Fractal North was "bulky"? What?

[deleted]

Re: The Framework Desktop is a beast

#300

Post by surajrmal »

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.

Do you think ssh is an equivalent to remote device management? Half the reason Chromebook does well is because it's really good at remote device management.
Post reply on HN