I’ve just read on the blog about the display panel to come with FW16, good stuff.
Is it in the plan(s) to release higher resolution panels?
3 Likes
@sinatosk 2k 16:10 sounds enough for most people and the ‘norm’ in high end laptops right now. Any higher would eat up battery life and cost quite abit
3 Likes
It still wouldn’t hurt as an option, a 4k panel that is 60hz. It gives you more space for programming, and when you plug it into a 4k monitor you don’t have to have everything rescaled or shifted.
@gna1 a 4k option will likely be availabile down the line, but ill say 2k is the sweetspot for performance/ resolutions for this generation, mainly battery isnt great and people want 120+hz in gaming. The industry is only phasing out 1080p and will take anotherwhile to make 4k optimal for the majority of systems.(most steaming sites still dont come with real 4k)
i think ill personally be fine without 4k for coding…
4 Likes
I realize that this is a matter of personal preference, but I have a hard time believing anyone would be comfortable using a 16:10 16" 4k display at 100% scaling. In fact, I happen to own a 16:9 15.7" 4k display (long story), and I found 100% scaling entirely unusable.
As I just mentioned, most users with their eyes further than 5 inches from the screen will likely need scaling to make such a display useful. This means that, ironically, a 4k screen would need scaling where a 2k screen wouldn’t!
Indeed, a 2k screen on the Framework 16 at 100% scaling would likely match up with external 4k screens quite well.
7 Likes
I really would love to have the option of an higher ppi screen, as I am currently used to 2015 15“ Retina MBP.
The 2019 MBP 16“ had 3072x1920 res @220 ppi so you can‘t distinguish individual pixels.
Would be cool to have this later on say @120 Hz and matte/glossy option.
1 Like
Framework’s display supplier does make panels with the exact same dimensions (and I think the same connector) as the Framework 16’s panel. So it shouldn’t be too difficult for Framework to offer other options.
If the mounts and connector positions are the same it may even be possible for end users to just buy and install other panels.
Some possible 3840x2400p (283 dpi) panels include the BOE NE160QAM-NX1 and BOE NE160QAM-NZ1.
At a lower resolution of 3072x1920p (226 dpi) there are also the BOE NE160F8M-N61, BOE NE160F8M-N41, and BOE NE160F8M-N42 as possible options.
Some other panels that may be interest to people wanting a different panel are (all these are at similar resolution to the Framework 16’s current panel):
- BOE NE160QDM-NM1: Very bright thanks to being Mini LED
- BOE NE160QDM-NZ2: Very high refresh rate (240 Hz)
- BOE NE160QDM-NM4: Both very high refresh rate (240 Hz) and very bright Mini LED
- BOE TV160DKT-NH0: Slightly narrower and taller, which should result in almost 3% more total screen space and more even distribution of bezels (compared to the current large bottom bezel).
The last option would likely require meaningful modifications to the top case (and different bezel options) so that may not be feasible, but all other options I listed do seem feasible from what I can tell.
If anybody decides to buy one of those panels and see if it works please let me know how it goes.
Most panel data I got from panelook.com.
Edit: According to this the Framework 13’s panel is designed to be glued into a laptop, so Framework uses adhesive to hold the display on a mounting bracket (and the bracket is then screwed in). It is possible to remove that bracket from the old panel and transfer it to the new panel with new adhesive, however a bit tedious/difficult. I suspect the Framework 16 will probably be similar.
6 Likes
@Kyle_Reis wow, that excellent analysis!
Do you know, is it possible to order a single unit?
Sometimes panels like those can be ordered as single units, usually intended as replacement panels for laptops that included those panels from the factory.
Edit: I don’t think the manufacturers sell panels like those as single units, but sometimes random companies will buy a large order of them and list the panels for individual sale online on websites like AliExpress. Especially if the panel is used in some very popular laptop (so there’s likely to be a decent number of people damaging the screen and needing to replace it).
1 Like
A post was merged into an existing topic: [FEEDBACK] Framework 16 screen and Linux (why not 4K)
I use 2x scaling exclusively, as I find 1x texts are too blurry and ugly, especially for CJK scripts. But 2k screens under 2x scaling is unusable.
1 Like
You can buy some of these from AliExpress, but the one thing I’ve noticed is that they don’t have the mounting tabs. I, personally, have been thinking about the BOE NE160QDM-NM1 once I figure out the mounting tab scenario.
These panels do not have mounting tabs and are instead designed to be glued in.
With the Framework 13 Framework glued mounting tabs onto the panel. Some community members reported success at using heat to remove those tabs from the original panel and then gluing the tabs onto a different panel.
If Framework is doing the same with the Framework 16 then that may be the solution. Although another community member suggested that it’s possible that as part of creating a semi-custom panel Framework might have included mounting tabs as part of the panel, in which case this becomes more complex.
If you end up doing it please let me know how it goes!
i personally would like to pick up a 1920x1200 display if it turns out this is reasonably replaceable with a similar panel. the native resolution of the stock fw16 display is too high for me, but fractional scaling tends to work poorly in my experience with the environments i favor, while 2x scaling is going to result in 1280x800. which works great on a steam deck, but this is … a bit bigger.
BOE (the company that makes the current Framework 16 panel) does make 7 1920x1200p display panels that might be compatible. Link
Depends on the OS. Windows is great and Linux depends on the distribution, although from what I’ve heard Fedora is pretty good at fractional scaling.
It’s also possible to configure the GPU drivers to treat the display as a 3840x2400p display then apply 2x scaling on top for an effective 1920x1200p. In my experience that technique gets results that visually look fine (like good fractional scaling), although I’ve only done that on Nvidia GPUs and it probably hurts battery life a bit.
1 Like
There are pull tabs on the adhesive, used to remove it from the mounting bracket. Unless you mean trying to remove the adhesive intact in order to maybe reuse it.
Unofficial Guide to Aftermarket LCD Replacement
1 Like
Oh nice! I misremembered.
yeah, i briefly browsed panellook myself before writing my post, but i decided diving deeper into “what is actually required” was beyond me atm especially since nobody actually has a fw16 yet to examine in person.
this is why i specified “with the environments i favor”. i know there exist some that handle that specific task better, but i find them overall more difficult to work with for other reasons.
i’ve had poor luck with trying to force that kind of supersampling on amd on linux in the past, but admittedly i haven’t tried it recently due to a lack of need. i might revisit that as an experiment, though rather than concern about battery life i’d worry a little bit about the performance impact of throwing that many pixels around when leaning hard on the 780M. i suppose the only way to find out would be to test.
Just wanted to give an update on my opinion about the F16’s display size and resolution now that mine came in: It’s great! As soon as I went into Fedora’s settings and turned on “large text”, everything became the perfect size – no scaling needed.
They also absolutely NAILED the refresh rate. Everything feels so gat dang SMOOTH on 165 Hz, even if you aren’t gaming! It really should be the new norm; I don’t know if I could ever go back.
1 Like
Also very happy with the display. The text clarity is excellent. Probably a combination of the brightness and contrast.
Thanks for point out the large text option in Fedora, didn’t know about that.