• Brkdncr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Love this. I don’t know much about risc-v but I’d love to see it disrupt the market a bit.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    6 months ago

    This board also has soldered memory and uses MicroSD cards and eMMC for storage, both of which are limitations of the processor.

    Ah, yeah, hard no from me dog. Can we get one of the new Snapdragons tho? Please?

    • j4k3@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      80
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      Qualcomm and Broadcom are the two biggest reasons you don’t own your devices any more. That is the last option anyone that cares about ownership should care about. You should expect an orphaned kernel just like all their other mobile garbage. Qualcomm is like the Satan of hardware manufacturers. The world would be a much better place if Qualcomm and Broadcom were not in it at all.

      • TFO Winder@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        What did they do ? I thought all processor are following standards hence I am running Linux on my Intel or AMD CPU.

        • j4k3@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          30
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago
          All their hardware documentation is locked under NDA nothing is publicly available about the hardware at the hardware registers level.

          For instance, the base Android system AOSP is designed to use Linux kernels that are prepackaged by Google. These kernels are well documented specifically for manufacturers to add their hardware support binary modules at the last possible moment in binary form. These modules are what makes the specific hardware work. No one can update the kernel on the device without the source code for these modules. As the software ecosystem evolves, the ancient orphaned kernel creates more and more problems. This is the only reason you must buy new devices constantly. If the hardware remained undocumented publicly while just the source code for modules present on the device was merged with the kernel, the device would be supported for decades. If the hardware was documented publicly, we would write our own driver modules and have a device that is supported for decades.

          This system is about like selling you a car that can only use gas that was refined prior to your purchase of the vehicle. That would be the same level of hardware theft.

          The primary reason governments won’t care or make effective laws against orphaned kernels is because the bleeding edge chip foundries are the primary driver of the present economy. This is the most expensive commercial endeavor in all of human history. It is largely funded by these devices and the depreciation scheme.

          That is both sides of the coin, but it is done by stealing ownership from you. Individual autonomy is our most expensive resource. It can only be bought with blood and revolutions. This is the primary driver of the dystopian neofeudalism of the present world. It is the catalyst that fed the sharks that have privateered (legal piracy) healthcare, home ownership, work-life balance, and democracy. It is the spark of a new wave of authoritarianism.

          Before the Google “free” internet (ownership over your digital person to exploit and manipulate), all x86 systems were fully documented publicly. The primary reason AMD exists is because we (the people) were so distrusting over these corporations stealing and manipulating that governments, militaries, and large corporations required second sourcing of chips before purchasing with public funds. We knew that products as a service - is a criminal extortion scam, way back then. AMD was the second source for Intel and produced the x86 chips under license. It was only after that when they recreated an instructions compatible alternative from scratch. There was a big legal case where Intel tried to claim copyright over their instruction set, but they lost. This created AMD. Since 2012, both Intel and AMD have proprietary code. This is primarily because the original 8086 patents expired. Most of the hardware could be produced anywhere after that. In practice there are only Intel, TSMC, and Samsung on bleeding edge fab nodes. Bleeding edge is all that matters. The price is extraordinary to bring one online. The tech it requires is only made once for a short while. The cutting edge devices are what pays for the enormous investment, but once the fab is paid for, the cost to continue running one is relatively low. The number of fabs within a node is carefully decided to try and accommodate trailing edge node demand. No new trailing edge nodes are viable to reproduce. There is no store to buy fab node hardware. As soon as all of a node’s hardware is built by ASML, they start building the next node.

          But if x86 has proprietary, why is it different than Qualcomm/Broadcom - no one asked. The proprietary parts are of some concern. There is an entire undocumented operating system running in the background of your hardware. That’s the most concerning. The primary thing that is proprietary is the microcode. This is basically the power cycling phase of the chip, like the order that things are given power, and the instruction set that is available. Like how there are not actual chips designed for most consumer hardware. The dies are classed by quality and functionality and sorted to create the various products we see. Your slower speed laptop chip might be the same as a desktop variant that didn’t perform at the required speed, power is connected differently, and it becomes a laptop chip.

          When it comes to trending hardware, never fall for the Apple trap. They design nice stuff, but on the back end, Apple always uses junky hardware, and excellent in house software to make up the performance gap. They are a hype machine. The only architecture that Apple has used and hasn’t abandoned because it went defunct is x86. They used MOS in the beginning. The 6502 was absolute trash compared to the other available processors. It used a pipeline trick to hack twice the actual clock speed because they couldn’t fab competitive quality chips. They were just dirt cheap compared to the competition. Then it was Motorola. Then Power PC. All of these are now irrelevant. The British group that started Acorn sold the company right after RISC-V passed the major hurtle of getting past Berkeley’s ownership grasp. It is a slow moving train, like all hardware, but ARM’s days are numbered. RISC-V does the same fundamental thing without the royalty. There is a ton of hype because ARM is cheap and everyone is trying to grab the last treasure chests they can off the slow sinking ship. In 10 years it will be dead in all but old legacy device applications. RISC-V is not a guarantee of a less proprietary hardware future, but ARM is one of the primary cornerstones blocking end user ownership. They are enablers for thieves; the ones opening your front door to let the others inside. Even the beloved raspberry pi is a proprietary market manipulation and control scheme. It is not actually open source at the registers level and it is priced to prevent the scale viability of a truly open source and documented alternative. The chips are from a failed cable TV tuner box, and they are only made in a trailing edge fab when the fab has no other paid work. They are barely above cost and a tax write off, thus the “foundation” and dot org despite selling commercial products.

        • 𝒍𝒆𝒎𝒂𝒏𝒏@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not the case with ARM processors sadly, IMO they’re a bit of a mess from that perspective. Proprietary blobs for hardware, unusual kernel hacks for some devices, and no device tree support so you can’t just boot any image on any device. I think Windows for ARM encouraged some standardization in that regard, but for the most part looking at Android devices it’s still very much the wild west.

          This is one of the many reasons why Raspberry Pi ARM boards remain popular for the time being, despite there being so many other cheap alternatives available: they actually keep supporting their old boards & ensure hardware on their boards works from the get-go.

          There are also some rare cases where Raspberry Pi rewrite open source implementations of Broadcom’s proprietary blob drivers, in one instance for the built in CSI (optional camera)

        • SGG@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          They make a bunch of the other chips that go into computer devices, and from what I understand it’s binary blob or nothing for a lot of it?

        • apt_install_coffee@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Both Intel and AMD invest a lot into open source drivers, firmware and userspace applications, but also due to the nature of X86_64’s UEFI, a lot of the proprietary crap is loaded in ROM on the motherboard, and as microcode.

      • apt_install_coffee@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        I work with SoC suppliers, including Qualcomm and can confirm; you need to sign an NDA to get a highly patched old orphaned kernel, often with drivers that are provided only as precompiled binaries, preventing you updating the kernel yourself.

        If you want that source code, you need to also pay a lot of money yearly to be a Qualcomm partner and even then you still might not have access to the sources for all the binaries you use. Even when you do get the sources, don’t expect them to be updated for new kernel compatibility; you’ve gotta do that yourself.

        Many other manufacturers do this as well, but few are as bad. The environment is getting better, but it seems to be a feature that many large manufacturers feel they can live without.

        • cornshark@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          How’s this possible with the kernel under gpl? If you’re getting precompiled binaries, shouldn’t you also be able to get their sources by law?

          • apt_install_coffee@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Kernel modules don’t have to be open source provided they follow certain rules like not using gpl only symbols. This is the same reason you can use an NVIDIA driver.

            Its not enforced so much by law as what the fsf and Linux foundation can prove and are willing to pursue; going after a company that size is expensive, especially when they’re a Linux foundation partner. A lot of major Linux foundation partners are actively breaking the GPL.

    • zelifcam@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      43
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      This is a dev kit. This is not for normal people to use. RISC-V is not there yet, but this is a good first step.

    • morhp@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      That doesn’t bother me too much.

      With the CPU being that slow, I don’t think you’ll really need a proper SSD. (And the CPU doesn’t have the required PCIe interfaces anyway).

      They probably could’ve added socketed RAM, but based on the photo, the main board looks quite full and messy with random chips (likely needed to work around CPU limitations), so it probably wasn’t a high priority.

      I’m interested in the cooling requirements and battery life.

      I’m not interested in ARM CPUs with all their weird proprietary stuff.

      • ferret@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        The mainboard looks cluttered due to the verbose silkscreening, it doesn’t actually look that complex compared to the other mainboards.

    • Linkerbaan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      At the point you want to upgrade this chip swapping out the entire SOC including the RAM is likely a better option.

  • zarenki@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    This board has the StarFive JH7110 SoC. That processor has previously been in very low power single board computers like StarFive VisionFive 2 (2022) and Milk-V Mars (2023), a Raspberry Pi clone that can be bought for as low as $40. Its storage limitations (SD/eMMC rather than NVMe) show how much this isn’t meant for laptop use.

    Very underpowered for a laptop too, even when considering this is intended for developers and doesn’t need to be remotely performance competitive. Consider that this has just 4 RV64GC cores, the cheapest Intel board options Framework offers are 12 cores (4P+8E), and any modern RISC-V core is far simpler with less area than even an Intel E core. These cores also lack the RISC-V vector instructions extension.

      • barsoap@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        You don’t need a laptop to use a framework mainboard, they run without battery and display and everything. So if you have a Framework 13 or are in the market for one this might actually be a very nice thing, especially if the price is comparable to other boards.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I guess? But why would you swap to RISC-V from their x86 boards? It’ll be slower and less compatible.

          I can see it for devs, but they’re going to want a separate laptop or an SBC, they’re not going to be swapping mainboards on the regular.

          • barsoap@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            You can develop using it as an SBC, then put it into the laptop when you go to a conference to present your stuff. Or if you really want to code in the park it’s not like it’d be a microcontroller, it is fast enough to run an editor and compiler.

            But granted it’s a hassle to switch out the mainboard. OTOH you can also use the x86 board as an SBC so when you’re at home it doesn’t really matter which board happens to be inside.

            I guess from framework’s POV there’s not much of an argument, it’s less “do people want potato laptops” but “do we want to get our feet wet with RISC-V and the SBC market”. Nobody actually needs to use it in a laptop for the whole thing to make sense to them.

      • utopiah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 months ago

        Indeed I bought a Banana Pi BPI-F3 with SpacemiT K1 8 core RISC-V chip,4G RAM and 16G eMMC https://www.banana-pi.org/en/banana-pi-sbcs/175.html for €95.89 including delivery. The form factor is nice though and I do enjoy Framework mission and partnerships. Depends what people need it for, good to have more options than aren’t “just” SBC/devboards. I won’t buy one now but I’ll definitely keep it in mind.

      • zarenki@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I bought a Milk-V Mars (4GB version) last year. Pi-like form factor and price seemed like an easy pick for dipping my toes into RISC-V development, and I paid US$49 plus shipping at the time. There’s an 8GB version too but that was out of stock when I ordered.

        If I wanted to spend more I’d personally prefer to put that budget toward a higher core system (for faster compile times) before any laptop parts, as either HDMI+USB or VNC would be plenty sufficient even if I did need to work on GUI things.

        Other RISC-V laptops already are cheaper and with higher performance than this would be with Framework’s shell+screen+battery, so I’m not sure what need this fills. If you intend to use the board in an alternate case without laptop parts you might as well buy an SBC instead.

    • Synapse@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      73
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      RISC-V (pronounced risk five), is a Free open-source Instruction Set Architecture (ISA). Other well established ISA like x86, amd64 (Intel and AMD) and ARM, are proprietary and therefore, one must pay every expensive licenses to design and build a processor using these architectures. You don’t need to pay a license to build a RISC-V processor, you only need to follow the specifications. That doesn’t mean the CPU design is also free, no, they stay very much the closed property of the designer, but RISC-V represents non the less, a very big step towards more transparency and technology freedom.

    • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      RISC-V is like LEGO, where you can put together pieces to make whatever you want. Nobody can tell you what you can or can’t make, you can be as creative as you want. Oh, and there’s motors and stuff too.

      ARM is like Hotwheels, there are lots of cars, but you can’t make your own. You can get a bit creative making tracks, but that’s about it.

      AMD and Intel are like RC cars, they’re really fun, but they use a lot of batteries and you can’t really customize them. Oh, and they’re expensive, so you only get one.

      Each is cool, but with LEGO, you can do everything the others do, and more. Like LEGO, RISC-V can be slow to work with, especially if you don’t have the pieces you want, but the more people that use it, the better it’ll get and the more pieces you can get. And if you have a 3D printer, you can make your own pieces and share them with others.

      • cmhe@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        6 months ago

        “you” as in person with required skills, resources and access to a chip fabrication facility. For many others they can just buy something designed and produced by others, or play around a bit on FPGAs.

        We will also see how much variation with RISC-V will actually happen, because if every processor is a unique piece of engineering, it is really hard to write software, that works on every one.

        Even with ARM there are arguable too many designs out there, which currently take a lot of effort to integrate.

        • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          Sure, and there are more people with that access than just AMD, ARM, NVIDIA, and Intel.

          If game devs supported RISC-V, Valve could’ve made the Steam Deck without having to get AMD’s help, which means they would’ve had more options to keep prices down while meeting their performance goals. Likewise for server vendors, phone manufacturers, etc, who currently need to buy from ARM (and fab themselves) or AMD/Intel.

          And that’s why I mentioned 3D printing. Making custom 3D models of LEGO pieces is out of reach for many (most?) and even owning a 3D printer is out of reach for many. I have one, but I’ve only built a handful of things because it’s time consuming.

          As it gets more software support, we should see a lot more variety in RISC-V chips. We’re not there yet, but we should be excited because it’s starting to get traction, and the future looks bright.

          • cmhe@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It also means that anyone can make their own instruction set extensions or just some custom modifications, which would make software much more difficult to port. You would have to patch your compiler for every individual chip, if you even figure out what those instructions are, and what they do. Backwards, forwards or sideway (to other cpus from other vendors) compatibility takes effort, and not everyone will try to have that, and instead add their own individual secret sauce to their instruction set.

            IMO, I am excited about RISC-V, but if the license doesn’t force adopters to open their designs under an open source license as well, I do expect even more portability issues as we already have with ARM socs.

            • sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Compilers basically already do that, and distributed executables usually assume minimal instruction support. Compilers can detect what’s supported, so it’s largely a solved problem, at least if you compile things yourself.

  • neclimdul@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    When the first person opens their new laptop:

    “RISC architecture is going to change everything”

  • nameisnotimportant@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    Great, I’d be glad if they would consider shipping to more countries as well with localized keyboards

    • dezmd@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      6 months ago

      I mean, they at least offer a blank + clear ANSI and blank + clear ISO keyboard options along side their 14 other keyboard formats.

      • nameisnotimportant@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes that’s amazing — but a blank keyboard is not for everyone.

        Moreover, even if I try to cope with this setup, I still cannot receive the laptop and I’d have to use a power adapter

          • nameisnotimportant@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            Yes, and so what?

            As surprising as it may seem, some might still want to use the supplied charger because they don’t have spare ones powerful enough for the laptop.

            I have a Macbook with Magsafe and 6 USB-C phone / small devices chargers. None of them could power a Frame.work so I cannot just use another charger because it’s usb-c

            • erwan@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              Just buy one if you need. I don’t understand people who prefer forced bundles over deciding what to buy.

              Unless you think an included charger is free. It’s not, it’s factored in the price.

              • nameisnotimportant@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                Unless you think an included charger is free

                Spot on, last time I bought a laptop it came with a charger, so that’s why I was referring to this and why I was concerned about its compatibility with my power plugs.

                As I was still unable to order a frame.work yet I wasn’t aware that frame.work didn’t include by default a charger, so your point makes perfect sense.

                In this case then I’ll probably end up buying a charger — because none of them in my possession is able to cope with the watts required.