4 ms·

The tradeoff is that the Framework's battery life is garbage. I had laptops a decade ago with 2x the battery life. I'm lucky to get 3 hours of battery doing web

The tradeoff is that the Framework's battery life is garbage. I had laptops a decade ago with 2x the battery life. I'm lucky to get 3 hours of battery doing web browsing, and standby/hibernate on the Intel processor in it is so bad that it'll fully discharge in less than 12 hours doing literally nothing. I really want to like it, but my Framework is literally a worse user experience than my old 2016 Macbook Air and it's probably 3x the price at this point. Playing even a lightweight game makes the fans ramp to a frustratingly loud level and I essentially have to keep it plugged in at all times. It's also hard to express how oddly problematic having a 4x3 display in 2023 is. Almost literally nothing expects that.

ornornor 3y ago
A cursory search shows that various testing websites have measured battery life to be 7–8h on the framework which is decent I’d think? I have no firsthand experience but 3h in comparison seems low. Also, web browsing can be intensive if you use js heavy sites like linked in or even the GitHub homepage (when not logged in)
- bdavbdav 3y ago
  We’re seeing other thin&lights get double that nowadays.
kelnos 3y ago
Yeah, I'm with you on the battery life. Though I don't understand where you get the 12-hour figure for a full discharge while in suspend. In that time period I lose about 20%. (If you're running Linux, try changing from 's2idle' to 'deep' sleep; not sure if it's possible to change this on Windows.) The thermals are indeed terrible. My 12th-gen has this issue where it will sometimes overheat, and the firmware will lock all CPU cores at 400MHz (yes, MHz) for anywhere between 1 and 20 minutes, even though temperatures drop down to reasonable levels within seconds. Support has been completely unhelpful, and Framework doesn't even seem to be acknowledging the problem (which has been reported by quite a few people on their community forum). The display is actually 3:2, which is just bonkers. At least 4:3 would be somewhat reasonable (if very mid-00s), but who has ever had a 3:2 display for anything? I kinda get why they decided against a widescreen display: the mainboard needs to be 'taller' to accommodate the RAM and storage slots and the spacing for the expansion ports, and a 16:9 or 16:10 screen would mean a 'shorter' chassis, which would lead us to a much smaller battery. But man, the screen is just weird.
- pcdoodle 3y ago
  3:2 is used by microsoft on the surface. 16:9 is plain disgusting for a computer.
  - dnissley 3y ago
    Also the original pixelbook: https://www.google.com/chromebook/device/google-pixelbook/ https://www.google.com/chromebook/device/google-pixelbook/
- prima-facie 3y ago
  Are you experiencing degraded performance when running on battery or is it happening at all times? You might want to look into BDProcHot throttling. https://pastebin.com/JB3R2CdM https://pastebin.com/JB3R2CdM I returned a HP laptop because of this crap.
theodric 3y ago
The Framework 13's screen is not 4:3, it's 3:2 (2256x1504), just like a Microsoft Surface Pro 9 (and others). 3:2 is widescreen-ier than 4:3. I had a Surface from work and found no issues with using a 3:2 aspect ratio, so I'd be baffled if the user experience with the Framework differs. Most (all? I kinda stopped caring) iPads, incidentally, are 4:3.

ornornor 3y ago

A cursory search shows that various testing websites have measured battery life to be 7–8h on the framework which is decent I’d think? I have no firsthand experience but 3h in comparison seems low. Also, web browsing can be intensive if you use js heavy sites like linked in or even the GitHub homepage (when not logged in)

bdavbdav 3y ago
We’re seeing other thin&lights get double that nowadays.

kelnos 3y ago

Yeah, I'm with you on the battery life. Though I don't understand where you get the 12-hour figure for a full discharge while in suspend. In that time period I lose about 20%. (If you're running Linux, try changing from 's2idle' to 'deep' sleep; not sure if it's possible to change this on Windows.) The thermals are indeed terrible. My 12th-gen has this issue where it will sometimes overheat, and the firmware will lock all CPU cores at 400MHz (yes, MHz) for anywhere between 1 and 20 minutes, even though temperatures drop down to reasonable levels within seconds. Support has been completely unhelpful, and Framework doesn't even seem to be acknowledging the problem (which has been reported by quite a few people on their community forum). The display is actually 3:2, which is just bonkers. At least 4:3 would be somewhat reasonable (if very mid-00s), but who has ever had a 3:2 display for anything? I kinda get why they decided against a widescreen display: the mainboard needs to be 'taller' to accommodate the RAM and storage slots and the spacing for the expansion ports, and a 16:9 or 16:10 screen would mean a 'shorter' chassis, which would lead us to a much smaller battery. But man, the screen is just weird.

pcdoodle 3y ago
3:2 is used by microsoft on the surface. 16:9 is plain disgusting for a computer.
- dnissley 3y ago
  Also the original pixelbook: https://www.google.com/chromebook/device/google-pixelbook/ https://www.google.com/chromebook/device/google-pixelbook/
prima-facie 3y ago
Are you experiencing degraded performance when running on battery or is it happening at all times? You might want to look into BDProcHot throttling. https://pastebin.com/JB3R2CdM https://pastebin.com/JB3R2CdM I returned a HP laptop because of this crap.

theodric 3y ago

The Framework 13's screen is not 4:3, it's 3:2 (2256x1504), just like a Microsoft Surface Pro 9 (and others). 3:2 is widescreen-ier than 4:3. I had a Surface from work and found no issues with using a 3:2 aspect ratio, so I'd be baffled if the user experience with the Framework differs. Most (all? I kinda stopped caring) iPads, incidentally, are 4:3.