Potential future display preferences:

Assuming Framework creates a future model with dedicated graphics to back it, which would you prioritize - resolution, or frame rate? Or perhaps a balance between the two?

Monitor Preference
  • 4k 60 FPS
  • 2k 144 FPS
  • 1080p 300 FPS

0 voters

1 Like

When you say “FPS” do you mean the Hz rating of the panel?
Or the actual frames you’d get in a certain game?


Yes - the FPS you actually attain will depend on your graphics settings, the game you’re playing, and your GPU.

Where’s the e-ink option? :grinning:


I’d love to have e-ink with an OLED panel in front of it so you could switch between a full display experience and a low-power mode you can see in sunlight without it washing out, but I think that’s out of scope for this :slight_smile:


I prefer a 2.5K to 3K 60Hz option. something like 2560x1440 or 2736x1824
no more than 3000*2000 unless it is ≥ 15 inch

I really like my Framework. The screen is too small but that doesn’t matter because it is being used as a replacement for a dead desktop. It is driving a 4K 43" monitor and doing a good job of that. I do not foresee buying another one because of the screen size. I would buy a 15.6" or a 17". I want a 17" but I realize 15.6" has much larger demand and this is a business. The small screen size requires scaling that makes it impossible to get the benefit of the high resolution.

I have an LG Gram 17" with 2K resolution. I really like that as a device I can get work done on.


Wouldn’t a 4K screen destroy battery life?

1 Like

@Nixingit It would, technically. Although, this could in theory be an upgrade option for users who desire it, so it would have to be a choice for users. I would not like it to be a “permanent” feature change, such as all future Framework laptops being 4k-60, as that would affect the battery life for people who don’t need it (myself included). Perhaps a build option in the DIY section, or just as up upgraded panel in the marketplace would be a good option imho.


I’m assuming if a Framework laptop had a dedicated graphics card, it’d be 15" or larger for the extra cooling and screen size - but I could be wrong :slight_smile: And yeah, battery life will go down with any of these options, so going down to even 1080p60 would probably be an option - though mixing and matching all of these resolutions and refresh rates would be more than I’d expect tbh.

1 Like

You did realize that 1080p (which is 1920 * 1080) is equal to 2K (1920 * 1080), right?

Sure, but if you want to specify the resolution on, say, YouTube, then it’s 1080p, 1440p, then 4k. Why switch naming conventions there? I dunno. I’m guessing the k notation didn’t take off until 4k was a thing.

I would be happy with one of the colour e-ink technologies that are supposedly coming through, it will be worth keeping up with developments in that field.

Someone that rarely runs on battery might well prioritize a better display over battery life. Also, I’m unconvinced that it makes that much of a difference if you aren’t actually driving the GPU harder (e.g. typical office uses, not gaming/streaming).

1 Like

E-ink display option would be amazing… What Tim_Southwick said… or a dual-sided monitor panel, like Lenovo ThinkBook Plus Gen 2. OR, a separate, high refresh rate e-ink display, so the users can swap the displays according to their needs.

Who are e-ink displays for?

  • people who write a lot
  • people who read a lot
  • people who draw a lot
  • people who code a lot
  • people with sight impairments
  • anyone who wants to reduce their eye strain caused by looking into a light-emitting screen

Could an option be added for an OLED display ?

The contrast of such a display is just amazing and it’s hard to go back on more classical panels when you used a good one.


e-ink have about a maximum rate of change of 2 fps. And if you want to increase the longevity, 1 fps.
And it might be black and white (colored ones exist, but very expensive). And to do the longevity refresh it must cycle between inverted and non-inverted.

Yes, they are very good to the eye, but it is basically undoable.

I’m also not a fan of OLED (or even PWM LCD backlight) because how the lighting is actually unnatural. I would like to see some dampening circuit.

1 Like

Don’t interject logic into this! There is confusion to be had in naming schemes and consumers to be bamboozled into purchasing things!

Seriously tho, it’s freaking mess

Yeah strictly speaking 2k should be 1080p but I’ve also heard it used as “half” the resolution of 4K, which is (very) roughly 1440p

1 Like

Wouldn’t this defeat the point of a e-ink display?

Don’t get me wrong-I love the idea but check out technology connections and his experiments with it

1 Like

4K is exactly quadruple of 2K (e.g. 1920 * 2 x 1080 * 2), which is 3840 * 2160.
1440p is around 2.5K to 3K.

Exactly. Because nobody call “4K” as 2160p, even though technically it’s true
And then you will need to throw in aspect ratio into the mix, because so far everything is 16:9. And framework laptop (and many other devices) are 3:2 or 4:3

Not confused? Go read the list of common resolutions.

1 Like