Right, that will certainly get things going at a faster pace… /s
Entering contract negotiations with CM to have them pay for remaining boards will just result in a ton of lawyers fees and lots of delay.
I think people are blowing up a bit here over what’s at the end of the day, an enthusiast’s tinkering. PSierra’s results are very good, and he’s documented his methods/means very well. If you want similar results, go ahead and make the changes yourself now, no need to wait.
Keep in mind however, that Framework and CM have delivered exactly what’s on the tin. The standard heatsink with LM is capable of holding ~45W sustained. The board and heatsink design work as stated.
What PSierra’s modifications show are when fully optimized, this design can actually deliver much higher, to be competitive with the top of class machines using these specs.
The PTM change from LM still only solves one of the issues found anyway. It does not resolve the shim-heatsink interface. Nothing stops you from buying some PTM online and replacing the LM yourself. If you really want to get into it, go for the PTM-Shim-PTM sandwich method, if soldering is a step too far.
Also, for what it’s worth, every laptop I’ve ever owned with a dGPU and 45W rated CPU chip has made a lot of noise. The framework 16 isn’t an outlier on that front. +2K costs on a windows machine does not mean quiet. If you wanted that, you should be shopping Macs.
Ok, I agree with mostly what you explained quite nicely. I will just accept the fact I placed an order 2 months too early and for that I must suffer and endure.
@NEITG@Machine You will get your PTM, but not at the Pace as YOU want. You have to understand there are Delivery Chains and a Distributing Network.
Framework JUST implemented the Changes into the Production that doesn’t mean they have a Full Buttload of PTM in Stock lying around for beeing delivered ASAP. If you want it now buy it now. No other Manufacturer would send a Fix to an existing Problem on their Devices, they would write it off and wouldn’t be any transparent about it.
And Machine there are alot of People who have their Device alot longer than you and endured more pain with 3-4 RMAs on the Boards, that laid the Foundation that we get a Fix now.
In ideal situations from a brand new board that somehow doesn’t get the LM run off and degrade into a 30-35W peak at throttle.
The RMA board was lovely and quiet to start with to be fair.
Not what I said.
From what we seem to have been told, the PTM boards started production November but seem to be for new orders/builds rather than ongoing support cases/RMA.
And the “oh we still have LM boards to use up” stance, I don’t understand the logic of pumping out boards that will still have the underlying fault.
And lets not forget that this is a manufacturing/design fault that should be down to FW to rectify, not by “oh just request a PTM kit and DIY it when we eventually ship them next year”. Again, I had already requested a PTM kit in case this ever happened again way down the line, but my RMA lasted 2-3 weeks roughly before reverting. It’s really not acceptable.
The Settings stay always like i saved them in UMAF. I rewrote the whole PPT Settings with UMAF so i am more pleased with the whole TDP Profile. I set my TJMax to 98C, PPT Fast to 80w 15s/ PPT Slow to 60w 60s and PPT sustained 54w. It works with the the 180w Charger and the 240w Charger and when i use a lesser Charger with 90w or so the EC Settings overwrite my Setup until i use a Big Charger.
@NEITG It costs alot of Money to go through the Inventory of stocked LM Mainboards to open the OG Boxes, dissassemble every Board and redo them with PTM, reassamble and reseal everything. Yes its inconvenient for you but its easily alot cheaper for Framework to have YOU replace it. Framework is still a Company and they can not throw alot of money out the Window for Redoing every Board in Stock.
After reading this thread for a while, I finally decided to check my temps while running cinebench R23, and it explains alot
I saw that my 4th core spiked to 100C, just like many others in this thread, while the rest were reasonable temps. Makes sense for my score was about 14000, and why the fans recently felt like they were ramping up way too soon
Surely it makes business sense to stop shipping the LM boards though? They’re just going to have to either RMA them or send out PTM kits later down the line. It’s just delaying the inevitable.
Look, this isn’t about me. I don’t expect preferential treatment here like it seems to be alluded to. I would fully expect those who have had the 3-4 RMA boards to be serviced first as they’ve been inconvenienced the most.
But I don’t think it’s wrong to suggest FW should be shipping PTM boards to RMA/support issues before fulfilling new orders.
Not necessarily. It’s not a 100% failure rate, in fact it’s probably pretty low despite the length of this thread (recall there were 20 batches of pre-orders alone). PTM may be an improvement, but it doesn’t mean the LM was a failure, just not as good.
For one more data point, after watching this thread I ran my own test last week and got a steady ~42W at 100% under Cinebench, with all cores being within ±~5°C of each other throughout the temp range.
So my unit appears to be just fine, as I imagine enough are to justify selling them. But really, the true numbers are for Framework to know and for us to speculate about. And that’s ok. If there’s one thing I’ve learned in my lengthy career of product fandoms, it’s that we wouldn’t be true enthusiasts if we weren’t armchair CEO-ing our beloved manufacturer!
Nope doesnt make sense on a busines scale. The PTM in Production is applied per machine (ptm 7858 paste). Any retrofit hast be performed by manual labour. The Rest LM Boards are in stock and they will probably just send out a PTM Kit (PTM7950 Pad) if you request an RMA right now for you to install it by yourself. Its the easiest and most cost effective method for Framework. As said the LM doesn’t have a 100% Failure Rate and as any business they probably hope on most users not to notice the problems.
Perhaps I missed this part of the thread. I get that you are able to get closer to the max TDP of the chip with PTM, but if I am getting within the range of the FW design spec, what’s the problem?
Ok, phew, that’s what I thought. Yes, it’s a shame there’s some performance left on the table, but it doesn’t mean my unit is defective. Unless I suspect something is failing in the LM either through a decrease in performance or uneven core temps, I’m not likely to look for an upgrade. I rarely drive the CPU hard enough to spin up the fans. If anything, I heat up the GPU more.
