Hi all! I’ve decided to pick up a Framework laptop to run Linux on, and now I’m stuck trying to decide between the Intel Core Ultra and AMD 7040 versions. From casually searching the forums, it feels like most of the issues are on AMD laptops, but I can’t tell if that’s just a result of AMD being more popular/recent = more bug reports, or if the laptop is actually less stable compared to the Intel version.
From what I understand the performance of the Intel Core Ultra and AMD 7040 should be roughly the same, so my main concern is reliability (things like sleep/wakeup failures, graphics driver issues, hard freezes, WiFi, etc). Does anyone have more experience on this front, ideally with both versions of the laptop for comparison (obviously we can’t say for the Intel Core Ultra, but hopefully it would be similar to 13th gen)? Thanks!
‘’'Hi and welcome.
Unless you detail what you want the laptop for there is no sensible answer.
I’ve never used AMD since I started back in the 80’s
I used intel in 90’s for my software ‘degree’ in math and computing
I don’t game or ‘need’ a high spec. I bought the 11th Gen 1165 with 16B of Ram in Feb 2022 and it’s fine.
I use a little Raspberry Pi4 during the day, right now, for general browsing, it’s a bit down on some videos streaming.
I use another RPi4 as a server for a few years for my websites
I haven’t seen the slightest reason to use an AMD but they must be OK
I have Win 11 and Ubuntu on my laptop which i use for travelling an watching videos in the evening.
Thanks, I mostly do general web browsing and some casual gaming (as in like CS:GO and indie titles), with some occasional programming (but not enough to warrant a super beefy machine). I intend on just getting the base spec (Intel 125H or AMD 7640U); for me the stability is more important than performance.
The AMD is the first AMD Laptop that Framework has made, while the Core Ultra will be the 4th Intel version. So it might be possible that the Intel version simply has more history and thus is more stable. That said, Framework probably used a lot of knowledge building the Intel boards for the AMD board and as long as you’re not needing Intel specific features (like 4 full Thunderbolt 4 ports), I’d say that the AMD boards are generally more efficient.
I’ve used my AMD Framework since last September or so with zero sleep/wakeup failures or freezes. Has minor issues with the GPU (flickering with hardware accellerated video) but that was easily solved by system updates. And I’d say the Intel Wifi is generally better supported, but the difference is minimal. The AMD Wifi can cause a few minor issues e.g. when installing Windows, as the windows installer doesn’T have a driver for that included.
I have a 12th gen Intel and I considered upgrading to the AMD board but some items hold me back. 1) USB4 is not Thunderbolt 4 and across a variety of forums USB4 compatibility with docks is a very hit and miss affair. I have a lot of thunderbolt peripherals and simply cannot risk them not working with my laptop. 2) I get pretty damn good battery life on my Intel (11hrs) so that is not an urgent need for me. 3) Power management seems to be a rabbit hole on AMD that I really don’t want to dive into unless I absolutely have to. 4) All ports on the Intel boards are the same. On the AMD board not all ports are equal. I don’t need that extra hurdle. I run with 4 usb c expansion cards and I like it that way.
Given how many rounds of preorders the amd had that could be a major factor, the other one being this being their first (and with the 16 kinda the second but more like parallel) amd generation they have done whereas they have done 3 intel ones so far (and those too had their fair share of issues).
Power management is also a rabbit hole on intel XD
Now that is imo the biggest advantage the intel ones have at this point. (+ the at this point slightly better implemented hardware decoders on linux)
Just to clarify, are you running Windows or Linux? (I guess something working on Windows is better than not working at all, since it means the issue is software rather than hardware)
I don’t think the USB port disparity will be a huge issue for me, but I am curious to hear about the power management issues. I saw the recent AMD video playback fix, are there any other notable issues?
This one is quite an improvement but there probably still a lot more gains to be made. Outside video playback the amd platform already has pretty great good management and the beastly perf/w of the cores masks a lot of the sub optimal stuff. Video playback is getting better and is usable but definitely has a bit of room for improvement, that hasn’t been a reliability issue for a while it just uses a bit more power than you’d expect.
Generally if your main priority is stability especially on linux going with the bleeding edge is not the way to go.
I recently set up a DIY 16” AMD Framework with the Ryzen 9 7940HS, 32 Gigabytes of Crucial DDR5, and a Crucial 2 Terrabyte NVMe with openSUSE Slowroll Linux. The openSUSE Slowroll automatically installed a number of Framework specific kernel drivers. The current kernel version of openSUSE Slowroll is 6.9.9 so it has very recent drivers which is probably why everything worked perfectly with the standard install iso file. I’m using the AMD video built into the Ryzen 9 7840HS and it is very fast with no problems – openSUSE Slowroll works great with the AMD Framework. Every video codec works beautifully. I’ve been using AMD cpus to run openSUSE Linux on notebook and desktop computers for many years and have found AMD to offer better performance for less money.
