Mmmmm I’ll try a fresh install on a different device to verify next week. I really can’t think of a reason why I would have enabled this. If this is the case another case of PEBCAC… I still think that it should be visible in the updater that you are installing a beta version.
There is a way to see where it is pulling from either /etc/fwupd/remotes.d/ and check the files to see which repo it is configured to use, or in Software check and see which one is enabled in the repositories list. Otherwise it is a feature request for the GUI. The fwupd package which is what is actually doing the work offer the fwupdmgr cli utility and that is the recommended method for interacting with it. Gnome-firmware is nice but not very informative and the integration in the Software application is simple, and intentionally so. It is assumed that you don’t want notifications for literally every concievable event and that he end user knows what is and is not enabled.
I went from 3.04 to 3.17 and started seeing the issue with ACPI temperature sensor 1 spiking randomly, and the fan spiking with it for a fraction of a second. I installed this via LVFS, and the fan is definitely not doing that anymore, which is quite good for my sanity.
Thanks for that!
Yet again, even on 3.18, I encountered another 400 MHz throttling—this time lasting at least half an hour in my estimation.
None of the BIOS updates have improved the situation in any clearly perceptible way.
This issue has wasted so much of my time that I find it to be highly disrespectful; it is absurd that this is a problem that has found itself so widespread on expensive, high-end, production hardware. Surely, in any sane world, this issue would have been identified prior to shipping faulty hardware to a large number of customers. My trust was evidently misplaced, and now I will continue to suffer either the unbearable throttling incidents, or the noticeably degraded performance by disabling Turbo Boost. Either way, it feels like I have wasted money on something that I cannot even use near to its full potential. The laptop is only three years old and I’m itching to have it replaced! This is bananas!
That said, I do appreciate that the device is still getting firmware updates for now (even if they are not fixing any of the several critical issues with the laptop).
Thanks,
5 Likes
(with great sadness)
Sorry you are continuing to experience this issue. I do wonder though since so few people actually experience this in a consistent manner or even at all what environmental factors are being missed. I can only assume at this point that it is most likely a per unit variable or a user induced variable. Troubleshooting something like this without a control unit has to be a nightmare. Without being able to replicate the problem, it is almost impossible to even begin.
2 Likes
Hi,
I am currently under linux ubuntu 22.04 running original BIOS 3.04.
My laptop is fuctioning correctely, i have one question:
If I install 3.18 could I get the 400mhz bug ?
BIOS Information
Vendor: INSYDE Corp.
Version: 03.04
Release Date: 07/15/2022
Address: 0xE0000
Runtime Size: 128 kB
ROM Size: 16 MB
Characteristics:
PCI is supported
BIOS is upgradeable
BIOS shadowing is allowed
Boot from CD is supported
Selectable boot is supported
8042 keyboard services are supported (int 9h)
CGA/mono video services are supported (int 10h)
ACPI is supported
USB legacy is supported
BIOS boot specification is supported
Targeted content distribution is supported
UEFI is supported
BIOS Revision: 3.4
To my surprise, the update installed via lvfs in standalone mode. But, there was no display output at all, while it did that. I verified that all parts are on the listed versions, so it seems to not have hurt, other than it had problems booting after installing the update on the peripherals and HDMI display, but booted just fine on a different monitor with native USB-C input (with PD) and then fine again on the original peripherals.
I just updated to this version, from 3.17. Everything worked fine, and the fan seems much less sensitive. I’ve done a few load tests and I can confirm that the only time I see it throttled to 400MHz is when there is no/low load.
Thanks Framework for continuing to support your products. <3
1 Like
I run powerstat on a freshly started system from time to time and the “base clock” on my 1240P is always 400mhz.
So this is expected behaviour on an idle machine and not the 400mhz bug 
2 Likes
It is interesting, because I am still on a 12th gen, and have been using it all this time. I am running Windows but also have Mint on there now. I have never had this throttling issue.
To be fair, this isn’t a Framework bug but an Intel bug affecting their 11th and 12th gen CPUs and therefore affecting many brands. I would imagine that means that Framework is dependent on Intel to some degree. Framework has demonstrated their intention of supporting their customers.
It can seem like they are not in some cases, but looking at the industry and the broader pictures helps to show that Framework really means what they say.
1 Like
It seems there’s a consensus among those experiencing the “400 MHz bug” that it is specific to the Framework Laptop 13 12th Gen Intel and that all 12x0P mainboards share the defect (so, not a bad batch but a design fault).
Assuming that’s the case, I see three possible scenarios:
- It is caused by a bug in the firmware developed by Framework → could be solved by a update of the BIOS and/or EC.
- It’s a design fault in the Intel CPU that’s mitigated by other (more experienced) laptop manufacturer in hardware → that means users of a Framework laptop are out of luck.
- It’s a design fault in the Intel CPU that’s worked around in firmware by other (again more experienced) laptop manufacturers → there might be a chance that Framework eventually finds a fix that ends up in an UEFI or EC update.
Finding a common trigger for the 400 MHz bug might help to prevent it (or at least reduce the frequency) as long as there’s no proper solution. I’ve created Framework Laptop 13 Intel 12th Gen: Stuck on 400 MHz or not? to collect some information.
No difference for me vs. attempting to update from 3.06 to 3.08 or 3.17 on a standalone mainboard. Installation still consistently fails.
Interesting, I am actually wondering if I might get the “400mhz bug” one day ?
Here is the log of my board, it doesn t look like I have the “2x0P mainboards”
: Getting SMBIOS data from sysfs.
SMBIOS 3.3 present.
Handle 0x0002, DMI type 2, 15 bytes
Base Board Information
Manufacturer: Framework
Product Name: FRANMACP04
Version: A4
Serial Number: FRANMACPA423120109
Asset Tag: *
Features:
Board is a hosting board
Board is replaceable
Location In Chassis:
Chassis Handle: 0x0003
Type: Motherboard
Contained Object Handles: 0
Handle 0x0027, DMI type 41, 11 bytes
Onboard Device
Reference Designation: IGD
Type: Video
Status: Disabled
Type Instance: 1
Bus Address: 0000:00:02.0
- I HAVE : cat /sys/devices/virtual/dmi/id/board_version
A4
Will Hydroph0bia be fixed with this release?
1 Like
Just updated my 1240P from 3.08 via efi.
On the second run of the update, a green screen appeared, showing both PD controllers are on version 0.1.2e (as they should be).
In the bios however, PD controller 1 shows 0.0.00, where 2 correctly shows 0.1.2E.
I just updated, so I cannot tell yet, if the system misbehaves.
Will give a heads up after testing
Well, my bad, I knew I should have tried to find a less confusing short version for “Framework Intel 12th Gen mainboards with i5 1240P, i7 1260P, or i7 1280P processors” 
I think, that’s a mainboard with a 1240P CPU like mine.
2 Likes
Just today I upgraded to 3.17 and was immediately annoyed with the nasty fan spin-up noise. Thank you for reverting this! I don’t think I’ve ever had the “400 MHz” bug on my i7-1280P 12th Gen machine (although I’ve had some unexplained hard lockups and power-offs under high load), but if changing the fan settings is meant to try to address that (for those who do have the bug), I’d suggest making it an option in setup that can be toggled on and off depending on whether you want to try it or not. Going to more aggressive fan settings for all users regardless of whether they want/need that isn’t a great idea IMHO.
Sorry for all those who do seem to be having problems!
1 Like
Hmm just “installed” by default options, restarted and loaded through update on start up, but turned off after and now won’t start (power button and keyboard light up for a second then everything shuts off).
Was plugged in with a mostly full battery…
I guess its pretty hard to do a post mortem on failed bios updates.
Did the user really follow the guide?
Has the user not pressed any keys during the update?
Were any peripherals connected, that could have caused issues?
etc.
BIOS updates have always been a pain point in the whole industry.
I just scrolled through the thread and there are 15 reports of customers, who have successfully installed the update (+potentially a few, who have updated, but didnt post anything)
That brings up the question of “what was different on this one?”
Unless the customer can give specific instructions and it is reproducible for FW, it is hard to find out what went wrong 
Are they?
From time to time you hear from every board manufacturer, that a BIOS update has bricked the board, so it does not seem to be uncommon in the industry.
In the past i did not have the feeling, that FW Bios updates are notorious for bricking boards.
Again, FW does not know, what happened during the update.
Just because the customer claims to have done everything correct, does not mean he did.
Specially because the customer has an incentive to lie here, in hope to get a free replacement.
So unless it can be proven, that the update has caused the issue, i dont think FW will replace the board for free.
@Phillip_Williams This primarily is a customer forum (even though FW reps are present)
I wouldnt expect to get direct support here.
Get in contact with the FW support directly and see, if they can help you.
Hope you get your machine running again 
1 Like