Nope i didn’t test the ptm after my last solder run. But before i got about 60w peak with the the solder and ptm, but at that point i suspect it wasnt fully soldered at that point.
I used some generic 138c solder paste from Amazon and a chinese hot air solder station from Amazon. I didnt even remove the solder from the OG Shim i soldered over/onto that spot.
This is great news. I have my RMA on hold so maybe when this PTM7958 solution becomes available I can move forward with the RMA. Kudos to FW for making an effort to address it and not shoving it under the carpet. This is a positive development in the right direction, not sure if this fix is the perfect fix but it is significantly better than what we have now. I do want FW to be successful!
Yep, we’ll be publishing a detailed step by step guide. Note that in production, we’re using the paste version of the PTM. For the kits we’ll be providing to existing customers through our support form (similar to the Keyboard Deflection Kit) and listing in the Marketplace, it is the pad version for easier application. It’s relatively straightforward to apply. Note that peak/initial performance is essentially the same between liquid metal and PTM. We moved to PTM to resolve the long-term performance issues that we’ve seen on some systems.
Would this guide contain steps or suggestions for determining whether or not our device is affected/estimating if the change would yield a performance increase for the given device?
Thank you!
That’s awesome to read
I’ve not reported my thermal issues yet with Framework but will do soon when more is out
Will this revision be made available to those that have had boards RMA’d already and aren’t necessarily confident in the LM?
They stated in the Deep Dive, “to everyone experiencing degradation”
Are you also going to put ptm on the 13? At least the amd does benefit quite a bit from it and it would likely reduce the fan noise complaint in reviews.
Yes but does that include those that have had RMAs and while are not currently experiencing the issue would rather not have the LM any more
Why not? Yours didn’t have the Upgrade and they will provide it as hassle free as Framework wants to be. Ask for the kit when its avail. Did you have degrad since the receive of the rmad board? I will definitly ask for the Kit even as my current performance is alot higher than it would be. Also the deflection Kit is sent out when you just ask for it. I will combine this and ask for the deflection kit together with the ptm kit, to reduce shipment hassle/cost.
I need to do another test, but I feel like the fans are ramping up again a lot more
My laptop seems the exact same, and I also suffer from the thermal issue. I have noticed this, since lately I have been feeling my laptop flexing and creaking more than usual - and then I found this thread.
I am experiencing more than a little bit of buyer’s remorse at this point… I really wish I hadn’t jumped on the first-generation product. But oh well, we are here. I am already happy to see a fix for the thermal issues being offered.
Actually, I heard them mention, that some time during the many batches of manufacturing they changed how the liquid metal spreader (the silver piece) bonds to the heatsink (the copper piece), that the change is mostly to improve yields, but also improved the transfer efficiency.
We can figure out whether this is the main cause if we like, do a “poll” for the batches and stuff. Except mine isn’t in a batch, I ordered it October. So mayber board serial number.
I think Cinebench score is pretty terrible metric. You can have a worse performing chip than the other computers, the voltage curve can be terrible, blah blah blah.
It’s like how you can get more performance by undervolting 50mV (?), but that doesn’t change the thermal … situation.
Just report how many watts and stuff. the “APU STAPM” and “cpu core” is not bad.
ok that’s really impressive. If they ever come up with a “heatsink v2” I’ll be getting that. Although, do you think they will need to change the heatsink design anyway for the next-gen Intel and Ryzen chips?
They probably do, right? The stuff won’t be in the same place, I don’t think.
They did the change before delivery of the First Batch. I did buy 2 Spare thinks for my Experiments and all even with newer Serial numbers had the badly bonded Spreader.
They will design a new Heatsink for a new Generation.
As i showed, the Heatsink itself is really capable and impressive, it is mainly held back by this Spreader/Shim. I didn’t modify anything else on there.
If i don’t change the PPT from the Stock Settings i do not even hit 95C anymore and its sits well below 90C in its sustained PPT limited 54W.
45W as mentioned in Framework Documentation and the Liquid Metal Deep Dive and the Heatsink Marketplace Posting is all due to the Shim Bonding beeing a Chokepoint.
yeah, the heatsink is highly … like, if you ever run the thing at 45W or whatever and touch the heatpipe, it’s not even that hot. There’s like 30 degrees of delta between the CPU side and the cpu cooler.
Getting 60W out of this chip will be insane, especially for eGPU users.
I cant touch mine anymore, after i bonded my own Shim on there 
It is really hot at an instant now.
But what i noticed, as the Heatsink is now transfering more Heat than before, my Case is hotter and my SSDs run 10C hotter now than ever before. But hey 59C is still fine for them
Its definitly to hot for beeing an "Lap"top now.
For me its no bummer as i am mostly stationary and the FW is suspended on a Vesa Mount. In undocked mode the Device is as cool as before.
Sure, the score can be different between processors in cinebench. The idea is that it’s a simple way to get an all core load, and the score can give a decent idea of if something is wrong.
This is hard proof that Framework could have accomplished these results.
I hope the PTM7958 fix provides something at least close to this. If the shim bonding is the issue and they’re not fixing that, I’ll be very unhappy.