# Thunderbolt 5 needed for this platform **URL:** \ **Category:** Creators & Developers\ **Tags:** compatibility, feature-requests\ **Created:** [April 23, 2026, 1:08pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067 "2026-04-23T13:08:43Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 18\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 23, 2026, 1:08pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/1 "2026-04-23T13:08:43Z")
The Framework modularity is fantastic, but is now hindered by the slower Thunderbolt 4 spec. 40gbps is not enough for modern HDMI 2.1 or 2.2, eGPUs, OCuLink, etc. Is there plans to upgrade this to Thunderbolt 5 on future laptops? Feels long overdue, especially considering people like me want to replace modern Macs with a _Linux-first_ laptop. Macbooks have had it for almost 2 years. ---
**Author:** ![tacsist](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/tacsist/32/39270_2.png) [@tacsist](https://community.frame.work/u/tacsist)\ **Post date:** [April 26, 2026, 6:46pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/2 "2026-04-26T18:46:16Z")
Unfortunatelly, as far as I understand, this is completly out of framework’s control and instead reliant on AMD/Intel, whos latest mobile chips do not support higher than thunderbolt 4 connectivity and have very little amount of available PCIe lanes on mobile chips for framework to use for an external TB5 controller. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2026, 10:13am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/3 "2026-04-27T10:13:20Z")
> I see a number of TB5 laptops, so Framework could implement this if they wanted, but yes, I understand it might seem better for them to wait for Intel to integrate. I wasn’t aware of that issue, very strange considering Intel develops and pushes TB5! Maybe framework should switch to Oculink instead! ---
**Author:** ![tacsist](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/tacsist/32/39270_2.png) [@tacsist](https://community.frame.work/u/tacsist)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2026, 10:59am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/4 "2026-04-27T10:59:53Z")
With oculing you hit the wall with user usability, because of inability to hot plug it and many others. And in the end you are still limited by the PCIe lanes available from your CPU, which for mobile chips is usually only 16. (This might be wrong) on gen 4 PCIe you need 8 lanes to hit the spec speed for TB5, but you also need 4 lanes for an SSD and in case with FW16 8 more lanes for the dGPU, so in the end you have very little wiggle room to add anything but the most nessesary components. So it is def possible to have TB5 on FW13 Pro, but it comes with a lot of downsides compared to Apple with their control over silicon. ---
**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:** [April 27, 2026, 12:20pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/5 "2026-04-27T12:20:08Z")
I am personally hoping the next generation of amd and intels mobile chips will have on board usb4 80Gbit/tb5 which should then cause it to be used a lot more. Thunderbolt itself was ultra niche before intel and later amd started integrating it into their chips and giving it to the laptop manufacturers for close to free. They could have put a dedicated tb5 controller in the new intel boards but that would have meant that 1 or 2 ports would be different and it would also mean much higher idle power if something was plugged into one of these ports as the dedicated tb5 chipsets that are currently available use a lot more than 0 power for just existing so since they went for absolute max idle power here I can see why they didn’t. Also the tb5 controllers currently available are expensive. Still it sucks that they keep just leaving 8 pcie lanes on the table completely unused in the 13, would be neat if the at least exposed them on some fpc connector or something so people could use them in custom builds but it would make the pcb more complex and probably marginally more expensive. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2026, 12:58pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/6 "2026-04-27T12:58:25Z")
Hmmm… Thunderbolt 4 is [only supported on Intel chips](https://frame.work/pt/en/products/usb-c-expansion-card?v=FRACCKBZ01) from Framework, correct? So AMD laptops operate at USB4 (min 20Gbps) or slower? Annoying that isn’t specified on the product page. Honestly I could care less about the expansion cards if they can’t support anything modern like HDMI 2.1, Oculink, TB5, etc. Is there another manufacturer that is really trying to offer a Macbook-quality product for Linux? (or do I have to wait several years for Asahi?) ---
**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:** [April 27, 2026, 1:49pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/7 "2026-04-27T13:49:42Z")
> [@Jonathan\_Cross](#): > > Hmmm… Thunderbolt 4 is [only supported on Intel chips](https://frame.work/pt/en/products/usb-c-expansion-card?v=FRACCKBZ01) from Framework, correct? So AMD laptops operate at USB4 (min 20Gbps) or slower? Annoying that isn’t specified on the product page. Certified tb yeah but tb4 devices do work with the amd frameworks (at full 40Gbit) just less certifiedly. ---
**Author:** ![Charlie\_Roberts](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/278dde/32.png) [@Charlie\_Roberts](https://community.frame.work/u/Charlie_Roberts)\ **Post date:** [April 27, 2026, 2:47pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/8 "2026-04-27T14:47:04Z")
I wouldn’t say it’s macbook quality (not a hidpi display, not milled aluminum etc.), but there’s a new System76 build with Oculink… I was surprised to see it included: [Pangolin Pro](https://system76.com/laptops/pangolin-pro) ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2026, 4:55pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/9 "2026-04-29T16:55:34Z")
I just saw this new [NVIDIA® GeForce RTX™ 5070 graphics Module](https://frame.work/pt/en/products/laptop16-graphics-module-nvidia-geforce-rtx-5070?v=FRAKMQ0001). The card itself seems to support HDMI 2.1b (plus 3× DisplayPort 2.1a on many models) – but the module itself doesn’t have an HDMI port or even a DisplayPort – so users are stuck with the ancient HDMI 2.0b expansion card – is that correct? Is it really not possible for them to have just exposed the advanced HDMI capabilities of the card? ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 29, 2026, 11:49pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/10 "2026-04-29T23:49:10Z")
Thanks for sharing! I have a Lemur Pro from System76 now – it’s pretty underwhelming in terms of build quality (especially compared to a Macbook!). I see this new Pangolin has HDMI 2.1 which is already a big step forward and the choice to include an OCuLink port is great for future-proofing. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [April 30, 2026, 5:44pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/11 "2026-04-30T17:44:00Z")
Just learned there is an [Oculink module “Dev Kit” from Framework](https://frame.work/pt/en/products/framework-oculink-dev-kit) too! ---
**Author:** ![Conor](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/conor/32/29835_2.png) [@Conor](https://community.frame.work/u/Conor)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2026, 2:54am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/12 "2026-05-01T02:54:54Z")
for what it’s worth, the NVIDIA and AMD graphics modules both have a USB-C displayport alt mode connection. you could connect an external monitor via that port, rely on another displayport USB-C expansion card, get a displayport expansion card, or use an hdmi 2.0b card like you’d already mentioned. ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2026, 11:20am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/13 "2026-05-14T11:20:58Z")
Can you verify which version of DisplayPort Alt mode is supported? What I really need is HDMI 2.1 (because it also carries Dolby Atmos audio), but at least DP 2.1 would allow high resolution for monitors. ---
**Author:** ![Conor](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/conor/32/29835_2.png) [@Conor](https://community.frame.work/u/Conor)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2026, 8:29pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/14 "2026-05-14T20:29:50Z")
That’s dependent on the mainboard’s processor. The AI 9 HX 370, for example, supports DisplayPort 2.1 - link: [AMD Ryzen™ AI 9 HX 370](https://www.amd.com/en/products/processors/laptop/ryzen/ai-300-series/amd-ryzen-ai-9-hx-370.html) ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 3:41pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/15 "2026-05-15T15:41:22Z")
But does that me that a specific Framework laptop will for sure support DP 2.1? ---
**Author:** ![Conor](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/conor/32/29835_2.png) [@Conor](https://community.frame.work/u/Conor)\ **Post date:** [May 15, 2026, 6:22pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/16 "2026-05-15T18:22:34Z")
Yessir! ---
**Author:** ![Jonathan\_Cross](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/jonathan_cross/32/47598_2.png) [@Jonathan\_Cross](https://community.frame.work/u/Jonathan_Cross)\ **Post date:** [May 17, 2026, 12:03pm UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/17 "2026-05-17T12:03:01Z")
Uh… which one? ---
**Author:** ![Conor](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/flex001/user_avatar/community.frame.work/conor/32/29835_2.png) [@Conor](https://community.frame.work/u/Conor)\ **Post date:** [May 19, 2026, 1:45am UTC](https://community.frame.work/t/thunderbolt-5-needed-for-this-platform/82067/18 "2026-05-19T01:45:35Z")
What do you mean “which one?” If you look up a specific mainboard’s CPU (whether we’re talking about a Framework Laptop 12, 13, or 16), you can find what version of DisplayPort is supported. I sent you a link to the AMD AI 9 HX 370 CPU in my response four days ago that showed its support for DisplayPort 2.1 - are you currently looking at a mainboard with a different type of CPU?