Great idea!!!
Yep!
I would like to see a beefier GPU with its own power supply hookup (maybe even USB-C). It would go to like 3/4 power when plugged in through the laptop and full power when it’s on its own power supply.
I think the FW16 made a good first impression, but it’s really going to shine in the future.
1 Like
Personally I would prefer it if Framework chose either Nvidia (unlikely) or Intel for their next dGPU.
AMD’s software support is quite lackluster especially compared to Nvidia’s CUDA + OptiX. Intel is also a lot more active with support for their oneAPI compared to AMD’s HIP.
If AMD was able to get their software game up, the experience would’ve been much more enjoyable. The 7700S isn’t even able to use AMD’s ROCm because they only limit it to their most expensive GPUs while Nvidia and Intel allow them on all of their GPUs.
Another nice thing would be if they had a dGPU with more VRAM preferably 16GB. Unfortunately if they go with Nvidia, that would likely be impossible, but Intel has a chance. They already have the A770M which is quite a good GPU and has the same power requirements as the RX7700S.
A beefier GPU might not happen mainly due to cooling and power draw restrictions, but it will be more performant from the generational improvements.
personally i think this is a good way to go for it, since any dgpu is going to have such a massive power draw that you really wont be using it on battery, so youll be near an outlet anyways. and this means that we can get a dgpu that draws 180W by itself (or 240W once we get power adapters that can deliver that)
though im not sure how it would work with only one adapter plugged in at either dgpu or mainboard
I would probably prefer FW to fix the usb compatibility problems with the current FW16 AMD before making a new board.
3 Likes
Here’s what I hope to see in the next version of FL16, in order of priority:
-
An optional split ortholinear or colomnar keyboard, as described in this post: Is the framework laptop 16 going to have an option for an ortholinear keyboard layout? - #5 by Lumi317
-
An AMD Zen 5 CPU and an AMD RDNA 4 GPU.
-
An optional Mini-LED screen, as this technology seems to me to be the best current compromise between image quality and sustainability. This BOE model might be suitable, I suppose: NE160QDM-NM4
-
LPCAMM.
-
An improved cooling system noise.
-
A 240W USB-C charger.
-
An improved durability of the case coating, as some people are already noticing its apparent wear and tear.
1 Like
When I’m considering using the FW16 instead of the FW13 for anything other than the graphics hardware, the main benefits I tend to think of are reliability. IIRC the official line on stacking two SSDs on top of each other is “it’s fine”, but I still can’t feel good about it. If I could get mirrored SSDs that looked like they’d not get hot and ECC RAM (AMD Pro APU?), I’d probably use the FW16 as my primary computer, instead of it playing the role of a gaming machine.
Any incremental bit of weight or size savings would help too. a 2019 Intel Macbook Pro is the biggest laptop I find easily wieldable in a portable kind of context. For me, the FW16 is “too big” but has compensatory benefits.
Yeah, the USB “compatibility” issue (whatever it really is technically) is a real pain in the butt…since FL13 11th gen. It’s no surprise at this point…which is kinda sad.
2 Likes
Having current Framework 16 with dGPU, these are the things I will definitely spend the money on:
- An Intel motherboard with Thuderbolt 5 support
- A touchscreen with a glass cover. Windows is better with touchscreen.
- After that will pay even more money for the touchscreen OLED
- An Nvidia dGPU 2-3 generations down the line.
None are likely to happen in the next couple of years, if at all, so probably upgrades every four years are my main thing with whatever Framework could interest me in.
As a current FW16 owner, I can’t think of a single thing that I’m missing, but I guess Framework can do the yearly CPU/GPU upgrade release cycle like the 13
I can’t see them adding speaker modules to the input deck, unless they can defy physics somehow
1 Like
I’d also love to see a click anywhere touchpad, similar to the the one on the iPad Pro Magic Keyboard case. It’s still a physical click and doesn’t require a haptic motor, so it should be able to fit in the same space as the current one
Which aspect(s) of physics?
Specifically in this case depth. Speakers need volume to be able to produce sound, and the input deck modules can only be so thick with the lid still being able to be closed. The Framework 16 laptop speakers themselves are pretty thick, I just don’t see being able to put them in modules flanking the keyboard in the current design
Seeing right now that my LED matrix modules move a little and are not rigidly fixed in place, Framework may also have trouble with fixing the speakers well enough so that they don’t rattle.
I think, more specifically, volume (loudness) needs volume (spatial dimensions). Think IEMs / ear buds, they pretty much can do 20-20kHz very well (the good ones)…just not loud enough.
Now, the spatial dimensions…you have three to play with. i.e. One of them is limited to the thickness of the keyboard slice…but the other two dimension are not insignificant. I would say, if you multiply that up, you actually have a pretty large enclosure volume.
Waiting for this to get mature enough.
https://product.tdk.com/en/products/sw_piezo/speaker/piezolisten/index.html
https://www.digikey.ca/en/product-highlight/t/tdk/piezolisten-ultra-thin-piezo-speakers
13 cubic centimeters (over 15 if the speakers aren’t a material that will scratch the screen if the screen flexes into it).
By comparison the speakers in the Framework Laptop 13 are advertised as having 5 cc of backvolume. So 13 cc is pretty meaningful (however accounting for the space taken up by the actual speakers and chips to drive them I doubt that anywhere close to 13 cc would actually be speakers).
Upwards firing speakers even remotely close in quality to the main speakers while working together with the main speakers with well tuned software could potentially be pretty good.
As an audio cassette enthusiast, I haven’t seen TDK outside of their blank cassettes (and CD-Rs during the 2000s).
1 Like
I’m more thinking of an incremental change:
- It’s always great to get a better CPU and GPU, but they should for at least one more generation stick to DDR5 SODIMM.
- But really, fix the USB port issues, the two front USB ports only support 4.5W and then will hard cut-out. Considering that an old Ivy-bridge laptop we have can do about 7.5W on each port before cutting off (or a total of about 14W), and that so many devices pull ~5W, its a real pain that some devices ALMOST work, but not reliably.
- The speakers sound decent, but with a bit of software equalization they can sound SO MUCH BETTER.
- Power management with all the modules is a bit of a mess. If they can squeeze a watt out of the rest of the system it will really help.
- The fan curve is really annoying. The fan ramps up slowly, so it tends to need to overshoot and then runs at full blast for a few minutes blowing out cool air before settling into a more sensible speed.
- Charging with weaker supplies has been fixed and then broken by all the firmware updates.
1 Like
I’ve been looking at a Framework 16 since they came out, and finally sick and tired of nvidia drivers sucking for linux with my current rig, but really hard to justify now a 2 generation old AMD chip in it right now. I’m hoping for quicker iteration after the first generation fw16 for a new AMD 9000 chip and them simply skipping the 8000 at this point.
That and a second full length 2280 m.2 slot, pleeeease.
I was ready with cash in hand to buy a fw16 until I heard it only had a 2230 second slot and annoyed me to no end as I’m used to running raid in my laptops for the past several generations. That said I’m a bit spoiled currently using a Lenovo T15g with 3x 2280 and 4x sodimm slots for a full 128gb ram I was hoping to replace, even though it’s probably 2x the weight and thickness of the framework.