At least if you replace the mainboard from Intel or AMD to Arm, you need to reinstall OS for Arm (aarch64) system. The binary is different. For example, you can see Fedora Linux has x86_64 and aarch64 iso images.
For Intel and AMD x86_64 systems
For ARM® aarch64 systems
Below is the result on the computers that I can access.
On Ubuntu 22.04 (jammy) arm64 (aarch64):
$ uname -m
aarch64
$ file /bin/ls
/bin/ls: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, ARM aarch64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib/ld-linux-aarch64.so.1, BuildID[sha1]=63260a3e6e46db57abf718f6a3562c6eedccf269, for GNU/Linux 3.7.0, stripped
On Fedora 38 x86_64:
$ uname -m
x86_64
$ file /bin/ls
/bin/ls: ELF 64-bit LSB pie executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), dynamically linked, interpreter /lib64/ld-linux-x86-64.so.2, BuildID[sha1]=a146002a40b622e4d8420c5b96513f0784c8eb7b, for GNU/Linux 3.2.0, stripped
Sure, you’re right, the OS and all the binaries would have to be changed to their ARM compilation. (Having the user’s personal files stored in a different partition could make the switch less painful) . My question was just about the hardware level. Software obviously would change.
Framework is open to working with other vendors to provide third party mainboards. I previously suggested Pine64. Alternatively, maybe someone in the Raspberry Pi community can work to bring the RPi5 compute model with a carrier board that works with the Framework chassis.
Qualcomm finally announced the Snapdragon X Elite today, which is intended to rival Intel / AMD and the Apple M2 on laptops. This Ars Technica article provides some insight.
Would be awesome to have a fanless Framework 13 running on ARM!
It only supports LPDDR5X. The Dell CAMM module need to be available to public before framework start to consider this chip, or Framework Laptop will lose upgradability.
I’ll believe the Elite X hype when I see it. Qualcomm doesn’t have a good track record in this market.
From what I’m hearing, while the design of the core is quite good thanks to their Nuvia acquisition, Qualcomm has made some business decisions that may make it difficult for this product to compete; requiring OEMs to use inefficient power regulation components in an attempt to seemingly force some vertical integration.
I’m looking forward to market developments once Qualcomm’s exclusivity deal with Microsoft expires in 2024 (I believe).
Samsung just announced their version of LPCAMM (different from CAMM but similar in some ways), already in development and targeted for a '24 launch. I can see an ARM FW in the next 5 years maybe.
Agreed, the SD Elite X would be a great stepping stone until hopefully Pine64 can release out a comparable and competitive RISC-V soc.
Having that more efficient architecture (and the relized AMD upgrade) with an open platform that I can upgrade into from the Framework is the vision I bought the machine to support.
Given that timescale, it might be worth “forking” the design of the Framework 13 chassis especially for ARM and other non-x86 architectures. There will be different power and cooling requirements, and this may also be an opportunity to introduce innovations from the Framework 16, especially the keyboard with custom firmware, not available when the x86 framework started. This is not to say that the x86 series should be loose support and upgrade options, that architecture will be around for a long time yet.
One possibility that excites me is the notion that with a smaller (narrower) mainboard a larger battery option unavailable on the x86 platforms could be introduced making for an even higher endurance machine.
I don’t think it would be in Framework’s interests to make more battery skus as it adds to logistical complexity. What I do see in general is increasing battery capacity within the same form factor from advances in battery chemistry or a switch to another battery technology such as solid state.
i agree with the general scepticism, but their own announcement talks about “leading OEMs” so i would assume there are a lot of negotiations under the hood. after all if the hype is somehow real if you’re dell you’d want in too. given how framework was comparatively fast at getting their hands on an unreleased new amd line of cpus (wide availability is a different story) i would not doubt that they’ve also been monitoring the situation.
The Qualcomm X Elite mentioned above only supports LPDDR5X (I’m not sure it supports LPDDR5). CAMM will make the non-upgradeable LPDDR upgradeable. If CAMM gets widely available and cheap, then framework will not have to worry if the ARM or RISC processors in the future don’t support SODIMM.