Jump to content

Talk:Framework Computer

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

More precise USB specs

[edit]

USB 3.2 basically means nothing, it could be Gen 1 (5 Gb/s), Gen 2 (10), Gen 2x2 (20), it would be great if someone could add which version of 3.2 it is! Esteban Outeiral Dias (talk) 14:55, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can say with 100% certainty that it is USB 3.2 gen 2. I am new to editing in Wikipedia, how do I add the specific version of USB 3.2 and add the source? I've been just using the visual editor so far with this article.
I currently run the Framework Laptop 16 (1st generation) on a Ubuntu-based Linux distro. I used the command 'lsusb -t -v' to display the tree information such as speed for the USB Hub ports and make it verbose. the output was this:
After checking the root hub speed for the Bus ports (not in the order of the expansion cards) Bus 002, Bus 004, Bus 006, and Bus 008 both have 10,000 Mb or 10 Gb speed. That is the speed of USB 3.2 Gen 2. The USB 4 doesn't show up, but it's probably USB 4 gen 1 (at least for the 7040 series) but it's not impossible for it to be gen 2. I don't know though.
Also, I have a source of the Framework Laptop official Github Repo and it shows mainboard schematics that shows USB 2.0, USB 3.1 Gen 2, USB 3.2 Gen 2, and USB 4 connections for the mainboard
Sauce: https://github.com/FrameworkComputer/Framework-Laptop-16/blob/main/Mainboard/Mainboard_Interfaces_Schematic_Framework_Laptop_16_7040_Series.pdf Thereel RTM (talk) 19:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Specifcally, I just barely made my account but have made 1 or 2 edits to this page without using an account, but I think having a name to the edits would be best! Thereel RTM (talk) 19:51, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Thereel RTM I added the USB interface specs to the Framework 16 section with Revision 1344817935. I intentionally omitted any information about USB operation mode (USB 3.2 Gen 2, USB4, etc) and instead used USB's marking name (USB 10Gbps, USB 40Gbps, etc) to keep it simple and concise. Mxdanger (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, instead of missing out of proper specs or overcomplicating the system, you used the speed and that's enough. Thereel RTM (talk) 04:39, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
It's not even just the speed. Those are the official proper names since 2022. I will admit it was a hassle to list the interface specs on AMD since each port is slightly different and it ends up looking a little messy. Mxdanger (talk) 17:14, 24 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"... short period of time."

[edit]

Below the Motherboard heading is this sentence. "There is an issue with the motherboards with 11th Gen Intel Core CPUs, that requires complete removal and reconnection of both the main battery and the RTC coin cell battery, if the laptop is not charged for a relatively short period of time."

Technically it may not be a run-on sentence but certainly baffles. For the benefit of readers aiming to understand, please rewrite with the antecedent preceding the consequence. Incidentally, how long is a "short period of time"? Rewriting as two or three shorter sentences is needed.
Thx, ... PeterEasthope (talk) 18:24, 11 November 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should the RTX 5070 be included in the Graphics section under technical specifications of the Framework Laptop 16 7040 edition?

[edit]

I am asking this because with the newest BIOS release the last generation Framework Laptop 16 (7040 series) can now utilize the Nvidia RTX 5070 Graphics Module, but it cannot be bought with it unless you buy them separately.

As of now it is not listed as an option for the 7040 series under the 'technical specifications' of the Framework Laptop 16, but I think that we should consider it because it allegedly works, I personally don't have the 5070 for my FW16, so I cannot say it would work for sure. If someone who has both the 7040 series and the RTX 5070 I would like to see if the GPU is backwards compatable. In a Q&A with Catastrophic and Nirav Patel they confirmed that the original display will not work if someone upgraded to the 5070, so G-Sync does not work properly without the 2nd gen display because the firmware is baked into the screen and is only controlled by the vendor.

Thereel RTM (talk) 06:31, 12 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I added that information to the technical specifications table. Made sure to specifically mention that G-Sync only works with the 2nd gen display and the Nvidia graphics module. It should work on the first FW16, but either way it's listed on the table as per "stock specifications available at the time of purchase". Mxdanger (talk) 22:47, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

this is a great big mess!

[edit]

hello all! i'm a (very!) new editor, but i decided to check this page and wow, there's SO much fluff here. i truly do not believe that the average reader needs to know about, for example, whether the 11th generation Intel variation of the motherboard has a CMOS battery issue, or who and what companies funded each round of seeding.

i also think certain sentences, e.g. "The upgraded model supports up to 96 GB of DDR5 memory and has a 2.8K 120 Hz display. The design retains Framework's emphasis on modularity, ensuring that most parts are compatible with earlier releases. Pricing for the DIY edition starts at $899, pre-built systems start at $1,099.", are written as if they're advertisements. even if pricing is pertinent information, i feel as though there has to be a better way to include it.

i want to be bold here, but i think that the article as it stands would require a LOT of restructuring and removal of content to be improved, so i feel as though it's worth posting on this talk page to get opinions before i do anything to improve the page and get rid of that ugly banner at the top :) i also began writing a draft myself to try and get a start on whittling this thing down. yukko~hey 06:51, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Tanakayuyuko, welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for your contributions so far!
I believe your criticisms are valid, there's already a couple of maintenance templates on the article regarding intricate detail and reliance on self-published sources.
Feel free to edit the article directly. If anyone has any issues with what you're removing they'll simply undo your edit, and then you can discuss with them here. Nothing will be broken or lost! SnowyRiver28 (talk) 06:59, 12 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Particularly about UEFI firmware sections, completely useless information to have on the Wikipedia if you'd have to ask me. I took a stab at better organizing and simplifying the Framework 16 specs table, and later plan to do the Framework 13 specs table. I shall see how that is received. Mxdanger (talk) 03:30, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
If you want to shorten this thing, just move all the product-specific sections to separate articles. It's overdue anyway. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 07:56, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
i was kind of wondering if the article ITSELF should be about the laptops, as they are by far framework's most significant product and framework do not seem to be doing very much of anything outside of the space. yukko~hey 19:41, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
as in, does framework, the company, merit an article? yukko~hey 19:45, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I personally don't think so, at least until they branch out into more product categories. Mxdanger (talk) 22:19, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Whether or not something "merits" an article is not a question that WP:CORP or any part of the concept of notability as conceived by the English Wikipedia asks, and certainly, their product range would be completely irrelevant to answering it either way. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 06:41, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
I think Framework Computer § Third party projects should be moved to new article all together or simplified down to just a paragraph. I would like to hear arguments why it should remain so detailed and take up so much space. It would also help get one step closer to removing the {{Overly detailed}} notice. Mxdanger (talk) 22:17, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
decided to do this without waiting for any arguments as i also found that the list was pretty much copy-and-pasted from the wiki over at Framework's forum, which was cited as a reference. i removed pretty much the entire section and rewrote it slightly (though left the gallery since i didn't feel like i could touch it without understanding why one might want one, or even six, examples!) yukko~hey 05:24, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
correct me if i'm wrong, but to my understanding, copying and pasting from a source that isn't EXPLICITLY public domain or under a few specific licenses isn't kosher around here, right? yukko~hey 05:40, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
Noting for the record that this tag isn't some sacred community judgement from up above, but something that a random editor just decided to stick on there more than four years ago. There's nothing wrong with that, that's how these happen to work, but you don't need to treat it with any sort of reverence. Dr. Duh 🩺 (talk) 06:41, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]
oh of course, and i don't particularly treat it with high regard! i just don't like looking at it. at the same time, i AGREE with that tag; this article is super overlong. i do think we should spin off the laptops into their own article as you suggested above (and agree that it's overdue!), and after reading WP:CORP, i agree my above question of whether framework "merits an article" was misaimed. my bad! yukko~hey 06:56, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Add Framework 13 Pro as new table?

[edit]

Framework 13 technical specifications table is starting to get increasingly wide, and I fear this will cause issues when adding the pro version and all its CPU configurations. Mxdanger (talk) 20:12, 23 April 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Framework_Computer&oldid=1350787424"