this post was submitted on 08 Aug 2025
10 points (100.0% liked)

Hardware

631 readers
7 users here now

A community for news and discussion about the hardware side of technology. Questions and support posts are also welcome, so long as they are relevant to hardware and interesting technologies therein.

Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
BrikoX@lemmy.zip
nomugisan@lemmy.dbzer0.com
10
Review: Framework Desktop is a mash-up of a regular desktop PC and the Mac Studio (arstechnica.com)
submitted 1 month ago by BrikoX@lemmy.zip to c/hardware@programming.dev
6 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Size matters most for Framework’s first stab at a desktop workstation/gaming PC.

top 6 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] recursive_recursion@piefed.ca 5 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

To me Framework's desktop makes no sense in this market.

They already have a gem of a laptop that is the Framework 16. So portability makes no sense.

And the fact that it's barely upgradable in comparison to a DIY/custom Mini-PC build with standard parts that anyone could select and buy using pcpartpicker.com. You'd have to pay me to want a Framework desktop.

No shame on them for trying. I just feel like this idea needed to cook in their oven for a bit longer before they decided to ship it. It just doesn't make a whole lot of sense for gamers, prosumers, or the enterprise market.

I'm still not sure who this is really for as the upgradability angle is out, portability is also out due to their own laptops, and performance is also out as you're better off with regular desktops as they have that upgradability option by default with the best possible performance.

I'd be interested in hearing what people think about this though cause maybe there's something here I've missed.

[–] usrtrv@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago (1 children)

As a FW16 owner, I wish it were a gem. It has potential but the support has been lacking.

[–] recursive_recursion@piefed.ca 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Well that's unfortunate to hear especially since I wanted to get one myself.

How has the support been lacking?

[–] usrtrv@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

There has been firmware issues involving battery life, performance, and charger compatibility. A new beta update was released a couple days ago that seems to rectify a lot issues but this is after 8 months of nothing.

There have been multiple devs working on an oculink port for the expansion bay but FW seems to be one of the roadblocks. Not sure if it's just communication issues or what.

There is an issue with the liquid metal not covering the die and leading to overheating. This has been fixed in newer models or kits to existing customers.

I don't regret my FW16 purchase at all. I just think it needs a bit more polish and a new GPU.

[–] recursive_recursion@piefed.ca 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

but this is after 8 months of nothing.

Yeah that's definitely a problem :/

I have to wonder if they're stretching themselves thin because of all the new projects they're creating and then consequently having to continue supporting?

I don't regret my FW16 purchase at all. I just think it needs a bit more polish and a new GPU.

Totally fair and a reasonable request as most people rooting for Framework that I've heard also wants a new gpu and hardware refresh for their existing laptops.

But yeah maybe Framework should hire a dedicated person for community communications to relay between existing customers and the devops team🤔

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

The SoC is extremely powerful compared to a Framework 16. It's 256-bit LPDDR5X-8000 instead of 128 bit DDR5 5600. 40 graphics CUs instead of 12. It uses full Zen CCDs with 16 cores, tons of L3, and extra cache on the IO die, instead of the reduced-cache laptop parts. Look up Phoronix benchmarks: it's more than double the performance in many workloads.

I'd kill for this thing on an ITX motherboard, in my tower desktop. There is just nothing comparible with so much graphics power with like 96GB of addressible VRAM, or so much CPU bandwidth unless you splurge on Threadripper or EPYC (and sacrifice power efficiency and ST performance). There is nothing I can buy under $5K that's even close.

Hence it's backordered like crazy.

If you don't need the performance or just want to game on a tower, it doesn't make sense, no.