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

Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

arstechnica.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 554 posts

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#261

Post by [deleted] »

simpaticoder wrote: post #169
GuB-42 wrote: post #163

It is a weird product for the Framework brand. The pitch for the Framework laptop is that it is repairable/upgradable/modular. Something that is uncommon for laptops nowadays. This is the opposite. Desktops are modular by default, so much is that my computer is like the Ship of Theseus, I never changed it, but upgrade to upgrade, it is a completely different machine than it once was (it started off as a 486!). This o…

I agree. I was an early adopter and have a Framework 13 11th gen intel (batch 4) and have been generally happy with it. Except the keyboard stopped working and I had to replace it, ~100 tiny screws later (and one stripped screw). And the battery drains fast (~24 hours) when suspended. And except that it won't turn on anymore without plugging into a particular USB-C port with a "dumb" USB cable (the basic 5V 900mA typ…

[deleted]

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#262

Post by AshamedCaptain »

Tijdreiziger wrote: post #233
Tade0 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Since when has DPI started _decreasing_ again? Since the pandemic. I have a still functioning Galaxy S8 in my drawer, which shames modern phones with its 570ppi density.

Having to render all those pixels drained the battery faster, though. It was more practical to keep it at 1080p.

Which is exactly why they did do it and definitely do not continue releasing phones with 500ppi to this day. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Galaxy_S22#Display

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#264

Post by braiamp »

rokweom wrote: post #258
abound wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The soldered RAM is surprising for Framework, and doubly surprising for being so in a form-factor that usually doesn't have soldered RAM. Similar to what other commenters have expressed, it just seems like they shouldn't have built this product if they couldn't figure out the soldered RAM bit.

Apparently this is due to signal integrity. AMD says swappable RAM is not possible. Source: LinusTechTips video.

Yeah, in LTT video they are talking with the CEO https://youtu.be/-lErGZZgUbY?t=447

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#265

Post by poisonborz »

Tade0 wrote: post #150
AshamedCaptain wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it is not. It would be perfect for a 6'' phone, maybe. The goal is to have at least double the pixel density, and my 2016 tablet can reach this ( ~2700x1800 at 12'' ). Even Surfaces have been using 1440p at 12'' since 2016, and 2880 x 1920 since 2018! Why would Android & Apple tablets at much smaller screen size have higher DPIs, if 1080p was perfect? Do you expect to put Android tablets closer to your face than…

> Since when has DPI started _decreasing_ again? Since the pandemic. I have a still functioning Galaxy S8 in my drawer, which shames modern phones with its 570ppi density.

Only because of Samsung's VR headsets, it was ridiculous and useless otherwise.

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#266

Post by starkparker »

brunoqc wrote: post #203
forevernoob wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> ...the first Framework Laptop 12 motherboard is going to use Intel's 13th-generation Core i3 and i5 processors I _really_ hope they launch an AMD version (perhaps with an iGPU) soon after that. That and preferably with Libreboot support. This would make it the ideal portable laptop for me and thus I'd be able to (finally!) replace my X220T.

Why would you prefer AMD? price, heat/fan noise?

Framework shipped AMD 7040-series and 13th-gen Core i-series alongside each other for the 13.

The 13th-gen Intels had miserable battery life and heat issues under load. If you could manage that, all four USB-C ports were full Thunderbolt ports equally capable of driving displays, PD, and USB 4 throughput.

The AMD line had considerably better performance-per-watt but rougher firmware support (and early on, really broken Linux kernel support that required Fedora or other rolling kernel release distros). It also couldn't deliver the same "every port does everything" promise that the Intel boards did, with some ports not supporting displays or USB 4, which significantly reduced the value of the expansion-card model to kind of a novelty.

On the 12, if it's likely also going to have a smaller batter than the 13, going only with 13th-gen Intels means it likely will be either a further step back in battery life vs. the 13 or throttled to extend the battery.

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#268

Post by aseipp »

i80and wrote: post #29
sunshowers wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no other way to get 256 GB/s of memory bandwidth for this cheap, and that's quite valuable in many workloads. I'm curious to get one for compiling code too. You can get similar bandwidth with server boards that cost 5-10x as much, or with a Mac Studio that costs 2.5x as much.

Note that this is what CAMM[1] memory is intended to solve, although it remains to be seen to what extent it catches on. [1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAMM_(memory_module)

CAMM will be fine on laptops and other smaller form factor devices for CPU-class memory speeds, but it does not have the bus width or lanes to match solutions like Strix Halo, Grace, Apple M-series -- the memory bandwidth being a large part of their appeal. Increasing the bus width on CAMM modules is going to compromise many of the other advantages.

The problem is that these are integrated shared-memory systems with a single RAM pool. That's nice for a lot of reasons, but GPUs need many more memory channels and larger bus widths than CPUs do in order to do work and remain fed at a reasonable power draw. It's an inherent design trade off. I don't see a CAMM style solution for GPU memory coming anytime soon except on the low end.

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#269

Post by ThatPlayer »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #122
ozaiworld wrote: post #44

Soldered memory and no x16 PCIe slot on a desktop are interesting choices. Not sure who the target market is. Seems like the interconnect between boards is also pretty slow compared to Nvidia Digits or even thunderbolt 5.

Laptop chips often only have x8.

Looks like the Ryzen AI Max chips do have x16: https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/ai-3...

But you probably want M.2 slots over a single x16 slot.

Re: Framework's first desktop is a strange–but unique–mini ITX gaming PC

#270

Post by smarx007 »

yellow_lead wrote: post #212
rdedev wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://youtu.be/-lErGZZgUbY The ceo kind of explains why in this video. In essence it seems to be a limitation of the chip from AMD

From 7:40~ "The signal integrity doesn't work out." I don't understand, but maybe someone else could explain.

See https://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/29141/interc...

At some point (if you go to high enough frequencies), the capacitance of the copper traces will become high enough (i.e. without any capacitor component connecting to a trace between a CPU and a RAM module) to prevent further frequency increases. One way to deal with that is to have shorter traces. This is exactly what CAMM memory modules do - they have shorter (total) traces than DIMM. Even shorter traces are possible if you get rid of modules completely (i.e. solder the RAM chips to the motherboard). Better yet is to place RAM and CPU cores on one chip, skipping even the motherboard traces between the CPU and RAM chips.

Post reply on HN