Can confirm that all the issues I was having while trying to charge with certain power adapters are resolved. Thanks for the update!
1 Like
got the same value. Issue seems to be solved.
I think FW did that for Intel 11th,
Maybe they will update the AMD page down the road?
1 Like
After updating to 3.03b, I don’t see any change from the previous behavior for this 25W charger (which claims to support power delivery)–it still charges for a second or so, then doesn’t charge for a second or so, then repeats the cycle. It was able to get the laptop from 55% to 90% overnight when it was turned off, but it can’t maintain a charge level when it’s on. Are chargers from better-known/better-trusted brands working for people? A 30W Apple charger works, although I didn’t test this kind before updating the BIOS.
It’s now working with power supply that with a current lower than 3A, most <30W chargers work, “dumb” 5V2A charger doesn’t work as expected. The (minor) problem is that the computer only seems to pull 4A at very rare instances even with 100W PD power supply, most of the time the 20V is capped at 2.7A, heavy use only seems to reduce battery charging rate.
EDIT: does not work with 5V input. The photo shows the computer ic charging the 5V power bank, not the other way round. Sorry for the confusion
1 Like
Thank you for sharing. Initial testing seems to point to this helping with the issue of my machine not booting when plugged into certain USB power adapters; in this case a 2021 100W Macbook Pro USB-C → USB-C with a quality USB 4 (40Gbps) cable in excellent condition.
Is there any way we can we ascertain the validity of these beta files and that they weren’t tampered with prior to downloading and installing?
LogoFail vulnerability not being patched yet is a perfect example of how a malicious UEFI could infect our machines if frame.work website somehow was compromised. Perhaps there is some sort of signing for the installation itself that I’m not familiar with (come to think of it I did notice framework UEFI keys in UEFI storage).
Really am quite eager to see much newer AGESA versions and associated microcode patches to resolve the numerous outstanding critical vulnerabilities(and bugfixes) as soon as humanly possible.
5 Likes
Haven’t checked my BIOS in a while and it turns out I’m running 3.02. I’ll be updating to 3.0.3b soon. From what I can tell, there isn’t a release notes or anything listed for all versions for AMD. For example the 11th gen Intel has a current and previous release notes listed.
Can we have such a list for the AMD BIOS info page eventually?
2 Likes
Upgrade worked fine with fwupdmgr except for the missing signature problem.
I used the bootable EFI installer; working great so far.
Before, my Anker 747 charger would rapidly bounce on and off for 5 to 10 seconds before staying on and charging at full power. Now, it comes straight on full power immediately. Nice.
1 Like
If I run my battery down to about 20%, then with a 100W USB-C charger I see a good 4.5+ amps consistently. By 40% battery level it slows to about 3A. (I have the same TC66 usb-c meter, it’s great)
1 Like
After figuring out the compatible power brick & cable combination I’m able to get 61+W to the battery
However the power cuts down before 40% and the input power lower than 20V2.7A, likely due to battery overheating since the voltage is still well below 17.8V and if charging starts capped at 20V2.7A input it’ll maintain this current up to 75% charge instead.
One big advantage of Linux compared to Windows is that the CPU stays underclocked when idling even when plugged in. On Windows the CPU often overclocks at 1% CPU load when plugged in even if you select “power saver” or “better battery”, not to mention the suspicious high CPU usage & fan speed when AFK.
I think that the reason that many users’ battery degradation is worse than claimed 80% capacity after 1000 cycles. Battery testing is done in “ideal” conditions, i.e. 23~25 degree Celsius, 0.2C constant current charging, 0.03C cut-off at constant voltage and 0.5C discharging. In actual use the temperature is much higher, charging C rate is higher and the charging SOC is also higher (charging from 75% to 85% 10 times is worse than charging from 0% to 100% once).
Hey, what is the ETA for the full firmware release @Kieran_Levin? I’m hoping it solves AMD7840U/ GPD Win Max 2 (2023)/ DMI board G1619-04: Hibernation (S4, suspend to disk) or resume hang randomly. (#3168) · Issues · drm / amd · GitLab
1 Like
No more BSODs since upgrading. I was getting them occasionally and haven’t had any since upgrading.
Hopefully, Framework/Insyde can update us on AMDs mitigation for LogoFail.
2 Likes
awesome, me too
would you confirm also getting
1c7882e5d2c00e85b8820bac3eeea10219cad61815ed86d3fedde1fb018bce91 Framework_Laptop_13_Ryzen7040_BIOS_3.03b_efi.zip
2 posts were merged into an existing topic: [RESPONDED] Complexity rules for BIOS password? Why? (Moved)
My charger STILL doesn’t work on this update.
https://satechi.net/products/165w-usb-c-4-port-pd-gan-charger
I have to plug my phone in to the second port, then unplug it to trigger the charger to actually work on my laptop otherwise the charging indicator just goes on and off and it doesn’t seem to charge.
I bought a USB PD GaN charger which is supposed to be the spec and I’ve had to do hacky work arounds for 3 months with no feedback until a beta bios update that doesn’t even address the issue.
Like guys- I love this laptop, but this and the random blue screens are a joke. At least tell us what’s happening- we’ve had nothing but silence until this update which hasn’t even resolved the issue. Clearly something is wrong with power negotiation because once I do this workaround I can leave the laptop plugged in by itself for as long as I want but if I unplug the laptop I need to do it over again.
The specific USB-PD bug that this update fixes is described in the first posts by @patagona here: AMD Framework USB-C charger compatibility issues
USB charging negotiation is probably the most complicated charging scheme in consumer electronics. There is room for many different bugs in both chargers and devices, and some sloppy leeway to allow some bugs to be tolerated or worked-around in some cases, so it’s really hard to assign specific blame, unless you have some kinda expensive equipment and expertise to analyze the situation. Even the cables need chips in them to tell the device it can pull more than 3A through the cable (and probably max voltage too for higher voltages, I’m not sure).
In your case, plugging in your phone first affects the voltage/current offered on the other ports of the multi-port charger, and it depends on which specific ports too - in some cases the laptop is still offered 100W after the phone is plugged in, in other cases it’s only offered 60W. My guess is you need to get the charger in this 60W offering mode for the laptop to charge, the 100W mode doesn’t seem to work between that particular Satechi charger and the Framework 13 AMD and the particular usb-c cable you use. Exactly why, I have no idea, but it can be complicated. Bad luck, sorry.
1 Like
That sounds super unsustainable (more e-waste on chips) and unreliable (another point of failure). I prefer the traditional way of measuring voltage drop/internal resistance to get whether to draw max current and I don’t want to buy yet another cable specifically to beg for 48V
I have a similar problem, when plugged into a 4 port UGreen power brick the laptop only draws 2.7A the majority of the time as I mentioned before even it draws 2.93A with a 5V3A supply using the same cable, and when the power brick is connected to another smartphone, the laptop will draw 20V2.93A instead of 2.7A, very strange.
EDIT: 5V3A input doesn’t work, I misread the meter as it showed the computer was powering the power bank
Measuring voltage drop was never a thing in laptops, charger-id before was either a resistor divider on the center pin or in some cases some form of onewire eeprom to read how much it can draw from a power supply. Since the cables were part of the psu the computer didn’t also need to know the capabilities of the cable. It’s a safety feature and makes sense as long as there aren’t too many bad actors putting 5A e-markers into cables that’ll melt down at 5A.
48V needs e-marker for a whole other issue, 48V needs better built connectors cause it’ll arc harder if you unplug it under load.
Power sharing implementations in multi-port chargers can get very weird
I found an interesting way of identifying of whether a cable has e-marker chip. On the TC66 both PWR and PD switch ON, connect the TC66 to a power brick, it’ll negotiate 5V. Then plug in your cable after that. If the TC66 switches of the cable has e-marker, if it stays on the cable has no e-marker.
1 Like