# \[RESPONDED\] Coreboot on the Framework Laptop

**URL:** <https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791>\
**Category:** General Topics\
**Created:** [April 10, 2021, 2:51pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791 "2021-04-10T14:51:24Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 20\
**Page:** 29

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Alex\_I](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/alex_i/32/30907_2.png) [@Alex\_I](https://community.frame.work/u/Alex_I)\
**Post date:** [April 24, 2026, 7:32am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/593 "2026-04-24T07:32:13Z")

</div>

Thanks for the details.

I still don’t understand why Intel enforces it with Framework, but not with System76 laptops, they ship with Coreboot. What’s the difference?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Omega21](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/7c8e57/32.png) [@Omega21](https://community.frame.work/u/Omega21)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2026, 2:11pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/594 "2026-05-05T14:11:40Z")

</div>

So, all the mainboard are possible to uses CoreBoots?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CodeAsm](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/codeasm/32/9159_2.png) [@CodeAsm](https://community.frame.work/u/CodeAsm)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2026, 4:10pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/595 "2026-05-05T16:10:06Z")

</div>

No, not currently.

@Alex_I i dont know either. All i know is what been stated before. intel wants, enforces framework to do so, or probably to enable bootguard if they want to continue to recieve intel cpu. Who can tell what system76 told intel? Maybe they send more money. Or promised to do warranty on coreboot systems if there are issues, like cve/exploits, who gonna ship a update? If someone ports coreboot, is framework responsible? Maybe there is where intel wants reassurance ppl wont blame intel if the issue was coreboot? I dunno, fw said they have to enable it thus far. Speculation on my part, geussing. If FW stated a fact,it might be in the top post. Maybe if fw get seen as big enough by intel, or someone smart gets coreboot running anyway, and convinces intel its ok to allow signing a shim or full coreboot image (if the full image is signed, we can only inspect the code, not compile and run our own. The shim was supposed to maybe help place a “key” in “our” hands )

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![James3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@James3](https://community.frame.work/u/James3)\
**Post date:** [May 5, 2026, 5:21pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/596 "2026-05-05T17:21:44Z")

</div>

I think coreboot is coming.  
There are various threads showing progress on it.  
E.g.

> [@Coreboot/OpenSIL Porting Underway for AMD FW16](https://community.frame.work/t/coreboot-opensil-porting-underway-for-amd-fw16/81031):
>
> If and when this happens to the FW13 and is at least MVP then Framework becomes a viable option for me again. I got burned so horribly with the Intel 12th gen platform that never again will I buy a laptop without FOSS firmware already available. I sincerely hope FW is privately supporting this effort. FOSS firmware and firmware support in general has not been well handled by this company in the past. Hopefully the port will be complete or in a MVP stage by the end of the year.

> **[Framework 16 Gen1 Seeing Coreboot + AMD openSIL Port, Framework 13 AMD Gen1...](https://www.phoronix.com/news/Framework-16-Coreboot-openSIL)**
>
> Work is underway by 9elements on porting Coreboot plus AMD openSIL to the first-generation Ryzen 7000 series Framework 16 laptop and is expected to be followed by a similar port to the Framework 13 Gen1 laptop too.

You can give them a try.  
I think they can boot the OS, i.e. Linux, but various ACPI functionality is missing. e.g. suspend does not work yet.

But, you probably need to solder on some debug connectors, so that you can undo/recover back to a normal BIOS if you wish.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![maz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9c0ed/32.png) [@maz](https://community.frame.work/u/maz)\
**Post date:** [June 15, 2026, 6:21pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/597 "2026-06-15T18:21:41Z")

</div>

There is also this from today, someone at framework has been a busy bee getting some internal eval setup.

> **[Framework Computer Making Progress On Coreboot For Their Modern Intel-Powered...](https://www.phoronix.com/news/Framework-Intel-Coreboot-2026)**
>
> While we have seen Coreboot work-in-progress support for older Ryzen-powered Framework Laptops, it seems there is a recent uptick in development around supporting Coreboot on Framework Computer's modern Intel-powered wares.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GreyXor](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/greyxor/32/19357_2.png) [@GreyXor](https://community.frame.work/u/GreyXor)\
**Post date:** [June 16, 2026, 8:56am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/598 "2026-06-16T08:56:00Z")

</div>

[https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/93445](https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/93445)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![CodeAsm](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/codeasm/32/9159_2.png) [@CodeAsm](https://community.frame.work/u/CodeAsm)\
**Post date:** [June 22, 2026, 11:30am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/599 "2026-06-22T11:30:48Z")

</div>

this is cool 😃 (wish or hope this can be “backported” onto 12th gen intel… else i would get a newer gen mainboard at some point).

might be JohnAZoidberg owns or has a 13th gen for this purpose (or isnt bootguard locked?)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![maz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9c0ed/32.png) [@maz](https://community.frame.work/u/maz)\
**Post date:** [July 14, 2026, 10:45am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/600 "2026-07-14T10:45:05Z")

</div>

He’s a framework employee so I assume he has access to some of the unlocked hardware.  
I see Core 1, Core 3, and 13th gen are mentioned in the coreboot commits, no sign of 12th gen sadly.  
It is still an evaluation so I guess “no guarentee” of it ever being a thing, and still no USB4 support.

[https://review.coreboot.org/q/owner:dhs@frame.work](https://review.coreboot.org/q/owner:dhs@frame.work)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nat](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/nat/32/40478_2.png) [@nat](https://community.frame.work/u/nat)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2026, 3:45pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/601 "2026-07-16T15:45:58Z")

</div>

very cool, looks like a port for Framework 12 got merged too

I wonder what’s the future of those ports since there’s bootguard. Are we going to have a choice to flash between Framework signed Insyde and Framework signed coreboot?

If Framework was going to release official signed builds of coreboot, it would be awesome if these were partially reproducible and there were instructions on how to do bit-by-bit accurate builds (if possible) of parts of coreboot firmware releases.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Charlie\_6](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/charlie_6/32/22087_2.png) [@Charlie\_6](https://community.frame.work/u/Charlie_6)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2026, 4:36pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/602 "2026-07-16T16:36:54Z")

</div>

If the BIOS has to be signed, even Coreboot, it’s a form of Tivoization. Coreboot is licensed GPLv2 so it’s allowed. However Libreboot is licensed GPLv3

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mshook](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/f05b48/32.png) [@mshook](https://community.frame.work/u/mshook)\
**Post date:** [July 16, 2026, 5:36pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/603 "2026-07-16T17:36:51Z")

</div>

I’m not sure most people know what Tivoization means but you’re right! 😃

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nic3-14159](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/nic3-14159/32/24718_2.png) [@nic3-14159](https://community.frame.work/u/nic3-14159)\
**Post date:** [July 17, 2026, 4:31am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/604 "2026-07-17T04:31:24Z")

</div>

(Obligatory IANAL) Libreboot’s code is really just its _build system_, known as lbmk. That is what is GPLv3 licensed. It basically just automates running commands to build upstream coreboot (with some patches), similar to things like Make, Cmake, Meson, etc. The roms it produces would still be GPLv2 as per coreboot’s license. The compiled outputs aren’t generally considered derivative works of build systems and thus their licenses are completely separate.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![nic3-14159](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/nic3-14159/32/24718_2.png) [@nic3-14159](https://community.frame.work/u/nic3-14159)\
**Post date:** [August 19, 2026, 2:53am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/605 "2026-08-19T02:53:42Z")

</div>

The FW12 Intel Core Series 3 was just announced and there’s already a coreboot port pushed for it: [https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/95022](https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/95022)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Adrian\_Joachim](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/adrian_joachim/32/9949_2.png) [@Adrian\_Joachim](https://community.frame.work/u/Adrian_Joachim)\
**Post date:** [August 19, 2026, 6:16am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/606 "2026-08-19T06:16:53Z")

</div>

> [@nic3-14159](#):
>
> The FW12 Intel Core Series 3 was just announced and there’s already a coreboot port pushed for it: [https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/95022](https://review.coreboot.org/c/coreboot/+/95022)

And from someone with a framework email too.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Raulin\_Vincent](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/b77776/32.png) [@Raulin\_Vincent](https://community.frame.work/u/Raulin_Vincent)\
**Post date:** [September 7, 2026, 8:32am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/607 "2026-09-07T08:32:35Z")

</div>

Hello, i hope i’m on the right topic for my question: Should i buy a new or old Framework 16 with AMD if i want the best probability to have access to coreboot or libreboot in a few years ?  
I asked some ai (because i don’t have enough nerds friends like me haha), and they estimated that the probability was lower to have access to coreboot/libreboot or any others BIOS-liberating software/firmware for the latest Framework 16 (AMD) ? I used Google Ai, ChatGpt and Claude (not sure i asked the proper questions to claude on this tho). This is not the beginning of a “AI debate” post. It’s just a “i need a proper laptop and that would be great to have coreboot on it” post.  
Thanks in advance !

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![maz](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e9c0ed/32.png) [@maz](https://community.frame.work/u/maz)\
**Post date:** [September 7, 2026, 9:13am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/608 "2026-09-07T09:13:25Z")

</div>

At this point, on one really knows unfortunately.  
Recent dev from DHS (from framework) on coreboot repo has focused largely on the Intel Family devices, but I think it was a community member working on the AMD stuff? (havent really looked into that side of things as my Pro 13 is intel)

But none of this “officially coming” it’s been qualified multiple times in the commit history that they are doing this as a feasibility study to see if supporting coreboot as an option is viable for them.

If it then gets the nod, we’ll get an official announcement, until then its basically no guarentee.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![James3](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/b5e925/32.png) [@James3](https://community.frame.work/u/James3)\
**Post date:** [September 7, 2026, 9:58am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/609 "2026-09-07T09:58:06Z")

</div>

I think the closest we have to coreboot is this for the FW16 AMD 7840HS.

> [@Coreboot/OpenSIL Porting Underway for AMD FW16](https://community.frame.work/t/coreboot-opensil-porting-underway-for-amd-fw16/81031/96):
>
> Yes, I know - and it’s exactly what I said. I have various dumps and logs from stock firmware. As for EDID: That’s absolutely not the case, wouldn’t make any sense. GOP driver probes PCIe bus to talk to a GPU, reads EDID data from the display panel (or other available DDI links via I2C), and (seemingly) patches EDID/VBIOS as it publishes it’s own ACPI tables.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Velocifyer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/f1d935/32.png) [@Velocifyer](https://community.frame.work/u/Velocifyer)\
**Post date:** [September 23, 2026, 1:14pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/610 "2026-09-23T13:14:46Z")

</div>

I wouldn’t buy something in the hopes of a feature.

If you want a decent laptop for a good price, I recommend not buying one right now because of [RAMageddan](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2025%E2%80%93present_global_memory_supply_shortage).

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![GhostLegion](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/ghostlegion/32/3356_2.png) [@GhostLegion](https://community.frame.work/u/GhostLegion)\
**Post date:** [October 3, 2026, 4:06am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/611 "2026-10-03T04:06:25Z")

</div>

> **[Coreboot 26.09 Released With Framework Laptop 12 Support, AI Review Comment...](https://www.phoronix.com/news/Coreboot-26.09-Released)**
>
> Coreboot 26.09 released yesterday as the latest quarterly feature release to this open-source software for replacing proprietary BIOS and system firmware on a growing selection of devices.

Has anyone with a FW12 using 13th gen tried flashing Coreboot yet? If so, I’d love to hear about it

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Second\_Coming](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/second_coming/32/29330_2.png) [@Second\_Coming](https://community.frame.work/u/Second_Coming)\
**Post date:** [October 4, 2026, 12:04am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791/612 "2026-10-04T00:04:39Z")

</div>

This is what applies to most people here:

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/uploads/framework3/original/3X/3/1/31129a58eee4f18b0269d7fcd2cdd3cd70e95a8d.png)

 ![image](https://us1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/uploads/framework3/original/3X/b/7/b731a982a3fd9fec324ae14a73524e141ad176fb.png)

[Previous page](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791.md?page=28)

[Next page](https://community.frame.work/t/responded-coreboot-on-the-framework-laptop/791.md?page=30)
