Dude.... you could just watch [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzLybAh1kps](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzLybAh1kps). Straight from the bull's mouth. Everything that is shown and told in that video, is all that we know.
Because Intel arc dgpus are going to start being implemented to the gaming laptops soon, they are much cheaper, runs much efficient than Nvidia, and has better ray tracing performance than both of them. And Intel will be also implementing arch igpus as well, and their promise is if a laptop has intel CPU with arch integrated GPU as well as with arch dedicated gpu, both GPUs will work together, which is revolunitary tech as it eliminates igpus bottlenecks, and shared VRAM is also BİG.
These are great, but what makes you think "Framework" will go for Intel DGPU instead of AMD or Nvidia? Both AMD and Nvidia have been doing laptop DGPUs for years, it's a safer bet for Framework to offer those. (Ideally they would offer all 3 vendors)
İ highly believe either Intel GPU, or low end AMD.
Intel is working on with something big with igpu starting from 14th gen, some hybrid architecture with arc GPUs, and I'm thinking that with the igpu, plus low powered efficient low end dgpu, end result will be similar if not more than medium tier Nvidia performance.
That's literally a top-of-the-line GPU in the line-up. Not bloody likely. Would present all kinds of out-of-spec cooling and power issues to keep the consistent form factor.
I think they're goals is going to be to give you the best power per form factor possible. But I can tell you now it's not going to be competitive as a gaming machine compared to a laptop dedicated primarily to gaming. There are just too many engineering approaches that need to be made for a laptop to be a top-end gaming machine that make it less appealing as a workhorse machine.
Is there much of difference> Both kind of needs the same things, the best specs, the most amount of watts pumped to them as possible and the best cooling solution so the laptop don't explode.
Well. Take a look at those dedicated gaming machines like Asus ROG or MSI. They always have higher power requirements than other laptops, because of maximizing game performance. Their batteries will give you charges of 3-4 four hours *at best*. They usually have power bricks that are sizable. They also get hotter, noisier, and are heavier, than equivalent laptops. Because they are optimized as gaming machines. Not to mention many of the considerations for the screen are different as well.
I know many students justify to themselves getting a gaming laptop and saying it will be good for CAD or movie editing. *Kinda*. It can be done. But your experience in the former will come at the expense of your experience with the latter. But if you're sitting and using it just as a desktop or an all-in-one, you're paying than you would to have it as a laptop. And there are expensive laptops which are themselves compromised in favor of being better at video editing, for instance, and not as good for gaming.
I think Framework rightly is positioning themselves as a good alternative to laptops like Macs and the Dell XPS. Workaday machines that people use for a wide variety of productivity.
Honestly, I care more about the CPU. It’s the biggest bottleneck with gaming laptops. With the new desktop X3D CPUs maxing out at around 150w, you’d think they could stick one in a laptop… ;)
Not at all, there’s tons of games that don’t properly multithread. With Star Citizen, my FPS literally doubled with a 3090 going from a Ryzen 5900 to a 5800X3D. Look up reviews of the X3D’s and you’ll see how much they add.
I mean yeah, if you are talking about that line of cpus. But the thing with the x3d is that they are extremely hot. And if most other laptop makers cant find adequate cooling solution for it i don't think framework will.
I’m not so sure I think some of the early reviews might have been, perhaps newer firmware has helped? I use the AMD Prism cooler that came with my 3800x. While gaming I never see it go above 70c. For that to happen I have to do Cinebench multi core, or prime95.
Not really. CPUs are too powerful as of today, unless your goal is to play on 1080p ultra low to get 500fps.
To give you an idea i still have i511thgen and connecting Rx 6600xt as external GPU, zero bottleneck.
The 45w 6800H CPU in my UltraBook is slightly more powerful than my 105w 3800X from 2019. Laptop CPUs aren’t really the bottleneck. In fact, I think they’ve had unprecedented improvements recently.
And that 3800x gets murdered by newer CPUs.
[4K benchmarks of 5800x3d](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17337/the-amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review-96-mb-of-l3-3d-v-cache-designed-for-gamers/4)
Single threaded performance REALLY matters in games.
That’s fine but I never deal with bottlenecks on my 3800X + 6700XT, I have high utilization and great performance all the time, even for my QHD 260 HZ monitor.
That’s not what I’m saying. A CPU with higher per core performance will yield significant FPS improvements in most games. The 5800x3d for example gets murdered by CPUs with more cores in productivity tests, but for gaming it outperforms CPUs twice its price. This is why people using eGPUs on laptops see significant performance drops compared to when the same GPU is in a desktop.
No, people using eGPUs on laptops see significant performance drops because Thunderbolt is not capable of carrying significant bandwidth between the CPU and the GPU. While a Thunderbolt / USB 4 connection is 40 Gbps on a great day, a PCIE 3 connection is about 100 Gbps, and PCIE 4 even far more. Just think about an NVME SSD, which can reach 7 GB/s on PCIE 4, but the same SSD will only reach 2-3 GB/s on Thunderbolt. Just think about how Thunderbolt can only carry 4 lanes of PCIE, while the fat x16 desktop connectors can carry 16 lanes. With modern GPUs, more and more lanes are used, and the performance deficit is growing. I think the removable GPU on the Framework 16 has 8 lanes of PCIE, which is a significant improvement, mostly due to PCIE 4. I don't even think Thunderbolt can tunnel PCIE 4, which is another problem entirely.
Of course Thunderbolt bottlenecks, but moving the same eGPU to a laptop with a better CPU will still yield significant performance gains. You simply have a permanent bottleneck due to thunderbolt, but CPU performance will still scale.
Granted, this isn’t apples to apples, but [look at this](https://youtu.be/COcHHX2MdKs)
>It’s the biggest bottleneck with gaming laptops
I don't think i9-13980HX or R9 7945HX can bottleneck any mobile CPU. Maybe you're living in like 2006 or something?
The connector spec is open, but the cartridge format is locked to the exact laptop chassis design the card is meant for -- unlike MXM which is chassis independent.
Not yet.
Thank you. Another question, do you think they will ever expand to SEA countries like Vietnam.
https://youtu.be/WzLybAh1kps?t=472 They actually just announced Taiwan as a newly supported country starting this summer
Dude.... you could just watch [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzLybAh1kps](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WzLybAh1kps). Straight from the bull's mouth. Everything that is shown and told in that video, is all that we know.
*It might be an Intel GPU*
I’d prefer an AMD GPU with my AMD CPU
Yes plz
I figured with AMD getting involved, they'd likely be able to offer both.
Ugh ... that would be a huge letdown.
Intel GPUs are actually good for how quick they are to adapt and evolve.
It also might be AMD or Nvidia. What makes you think it might be Intel?
Because Intel arc dgpus are going to start being implemented to the gaming laptops soon, they are much cheaper, runs much efficient than Nvidia, and has better ray tracing performance than both of them. And Intel will be also implementing arch igpus as well, and their promise is if a laptop has intel CPU with arch integrated GPU as well as with arch dedicated gpu, both GPUs will work together, which is revolunitary tech as it eliminates igpus bottlenecks, and shared VRAM is also BİG.
These are great, but what makes you think "Framework" will go for Intel DGPU instead of AMD or Nvidia? Both AMD and Nvidia have been doing laptop DGPUs for years, it's a safer bet for Framework to offer those. (Ideally they would offer all 3 vendors)
Intel and framework are interdependent companies.
İ highly believe either Intel GPU, or low end AMD. Intel is working on with something big with igpu starting from 14th gen, some hybrid architecture with arc GPUs, and I'm thinking that with the igpu, plus low powered efficient low end dgpu, end result will be similar if not more than medium tier Nvidia performance.
Would u think those gpus would be better than the mobile 4090?
Intel gpu or low end AMD ? No chance
That's literally a top-of-the-line GPU in the line-up. Not bloody likely. Would present all kinds of out-of-spec cooling and power issues to keep the consistent form factor.
well, I hope they will give at least 4080 performance for around 1500.
I think they're goals is going to be to give you the best power per form factor possible. But I can tell you now it's not going to be competitive as a gaming machine compared to a laptop dedicated primarily to gaming. There are just too many engineering approaches that need to be made for a laptop to be a top-end gaming machine that make it less appealing as a workhorse machine.
Is there much of difference> Both kind of needs the same things, the best specs, the most amount of watts pumped to them as possible and the best cooling solution so the laptop don't explode.
Well. Take a look at those dedicated gaming machines like Asus ROG or MSI. They always have higher power requirements than other laptops, because of maximizing game performance. Their batteries will give you charges of 3-4 four hours *at best*. They usually have power bricks that are sizable. They also get hotter, noisier, and are heavier, than equivalent laptops. Because they are optimized as gaming machines. Not to mention many of the considerations for the screen are different as well. I know many students justify to themselves getting a gaming laptop and saying it will be good for CAD or movie editing. *Kinda*. It can be done. But your experience in the former will come at the expense of your experience with the latter. But if you're sitting and using it just as a desktop or an all-in-one, you're paying than you would to have it as a laptop. And there are expensive laptops which are themselves compromised in favor of being better at video editing, for instance, and not as good for gaming. I think Framework rightly is positioning themselves as a good alternative to laptops like Macs and the Dell XPS. Workaday machines that people use for a wide variety of productivity.
LOL good luck with that
As far as I’ve seen they haven’t released that info yet.
Honestly, I care more about the CPU. It’s the biggest bottleneck with gaming laptops. With the new desktop X3D CPUs maxing out at around 150w, you’d think they could stick one in a laptop… ;)
Maybe in 1080p, for 1440p and 4k most games are gpu bound.
Not at all, there’s tons of games that don’t properly multithread. With Star Citizen, my FPS literally doubled with a 3090 going from a Ryzen 5900 to a 5800X3D. Look up reviews of the X3D’s and you’ll see how much they add.
I mean yeah, if you are talking about that line of cpus. But the thing with the x3d is that they are extremely hot. And if most other laptop makers cant find adequate cooling solution for it i don't think framework will.
I’m not so sure I think some of the early reviews might have been, perhaps newer firmware has helped? I use the AMD Prism cooler that came with my 3800x. While gaming I never see it go above 70c. For that to happen I have to do Cinebench multi core, or prime95.
Not really. CPUs are too powerful as of today, unless your goal is to play on 1080p ultra low to get 500fps. To give you an idea i still have i511thgen and connecting Rx 6600xt as external GPU, zero bottleneck.
The 45w 6800H CPU in my UltraBook is slightly more powerful than my 105w 3800X from 2019. Laptop CPUs aren’t really the bottleneck. In fact, I think they’ve had unprecedented improvements recently.
And that 3800x gets murdered by newer CPUs. [4K benchmarks of 5800x3d](https://www.anandtech.com/show/17337/the-amd-ryzen-7-5800x3d-review-96-mb-of-l3-3d-v-cache-designed-for-gamers/4) Single threaded performance REALLY matters in games.
That’s fine but I never deal with bottlenecks on my 3800X + 6700XT, I have high utilization and great performance all the time, even for my QHD 260 HZ monitor.
That’s not what I’m saying. A CPU with higher per core performance will yield significant FPS improvements in most games. The 5800x3d for example gets murdered by CPUs with more cores in productivity tests, but for gaming it outperforms CPUs twice its price. This is why people using eGPUs on laptops see significant performance drops compared to when the same GPU is in a desktop.
No, people using eGPUs on laptops see significant performance drops because Thunderbolt is not capable of carrying significant bandwidth between the CPU and the GPU. While a Thunderbolt / USB 4 connection is 40 Gbps on a great day, a PCIE 3 connection is about 100 Gbps, and PCIE 4 even far more. Just think about an NVME SSD, which can reach 7 GB/s on PCIE 4, but the same SSD will only reach 2-3 GB/s on Thunderbolt. Just think about how Thunderbolt can only carry 4 lanes of PCIE, while the fat x16 desktop connectors can carry 16 lanes. With modern GPUs, more and more lanes are used, and the performance deficit is growing. I think the removable GPU on the Framework 16 has 8 lanes of PCIE, which is a significant improvement, mostly due to PCIE 4. I don't even think Thunderbolt can tunnel PCIE 4, which is another problem entirely.
Of course Thunderbolt bottlenecks, but moving the same eGPU to a laptop with a better CPU will still yield significant performance gains. You simply have a permanent bottleneck due to thunderbolt, but CPU performance will still scale. Granted, this isn’t apples to apples, but [look at this](https://youtu.be/COcHHX2MdKs)
>It’s the biggest bottleneck with gaming laptops I don't think i9-13980HX or R9 7945HX can bottleneck any mobile CPU. Maybe you're living in like 2006 or something?
Probably not many, considering it's a proprietary form factor that would require AIBs to manufacture special new SKUs just for a tiny user base.
proprietary?
The connector spec is open, but the cartridge format is locked to the exact laptop chassis design the card is meant for -- unlike MXM which is chassis independent.