Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

NeedsMoreGPUs t1_jdfvvw5 wrote

The fact that they weren't using MXM in the past, even just offering the OPTION, was a huge source of complaints against their design. Yes it adds complexity, but MXM has been a standard upgrade option in various workstation and gaming laptops since 2006. When Framework ignored it entirely from the start it was incredibly confusing. Also no the size of the machine does not inherently limit their ability to use MXM cards, there's both MXM-A and MXM-B size modules, and MXM-A is small enough to fit into a 14" chassis. Dell/Alienware has done it over the years, ACER did it over a decade ago on some Aspire and TravelMate machines, HP has done it on smaller EliteBook and ProBook models.

10

UserInside t1_jdgzftt wrote

NVIDIA kinda fucked up MXM platform a few times. I remember MSI making GPU upgradeable gaming laptop, back in Kepler era GTX7xx, and when Maxwell came out (GTX9xx), they couldn't offer upgrade for a long time because of how the new GPU architecture was heavily modifyed in terms of power delivery. Also each MXM module cost an arm and leg individually, even if you are MSI/Asus and can get them for much cheaper than a random customer. Meaning it wasn't much more expensive to just sold your last gen laptop and get the new gen one.

So I'm still waiting to see how Framework handle this, because in the past much MUCH bigger company broke their teeth on that.

I'll need a new laptop soon, so I'm looking into this and hope for the best to Framework.

7