Framework says it's replacing some out-of-warranty AMD mainboards.
A BIOS update for the Framework Laptop 13 with AMD Ryzen 7040-series processors is bricking the systems, multiple users have reported online.
Framework started shipping pre-built Ryzen 7040-based Framework Laptop 13 computers and compatible motherboards in 2023. In June 2026, Framework released BIOS 3.20 for the devices. The update adds mainboard support for features, including a haptic touchpad and new speakers, for the higher-end Framework Laptop 13 Pro and fixes issues, including one "where the Battery Extender status was reported incorrectly following a reboot, hibernation, or shutdown after the timer had expired," per a post on Framework's forum from an employee.
Some users say that they installed the update successfully.
Numerous others, however, claim that the installation stalls, bricking the laptop.
"[T]he update process seems to have stalled," a Framework forum user named Sven posted in July. "What I see is a black screen and a progress bar with 2 dots and then the Framework logo. The progress bar is not moving for about 3 hours now. Also, I can't turn off the Framework using the power button, no matter how long I hold it down. Now the BIOS update is stuck, and I can not power down or reboot the machine."
Ars Technica contacted Framework, asking how many customers are affected. In a company statement, Framework said it has "received reports of a small percentage of Framework Laptop 13 7040 Series BIOS updates resulting in non-bootable boards." Framework is investigating the root cause of the issue, the statement said.
There are reports of users having problems with BIOS upgrades on Ryzen 7040-based Framework Laptop 13 devices going back to at least March 2025.
After the most recent BIOS update, some users reported that Framework support told them they needed a new motherboard, but Framework wouldn't provide it for free because the customer was past warranty.
Framework's statement to Ars says:
... in addition to replacing in-warranty Mainboards, we are making exceptions for out-of-warranty replacements where we can confirm a stable-release BIOS update caused the board to become non-bootable.
Framework is also introducing a "Crisis Recovery Mode" BIOS functionality to enable a path for failed updates to be directly recoverable.
"Our latest Framework Desktop BIOS release includes this functionality, and we are actively bringing it to Framework Laptop 12, 13, and 16 in our upcoming BIOS release cycles for each," Framework said.
We won't be sure of the source of the problems until Framework provides more information. Blogger Guanzhong Chen, however, wrote a detailed blog post this week about their purported experience with their motherboard breaking and suggested the problem stems from "some bug with the software that caused it to display what appears to be random memory on the screen, especially when this has happened before to other people for other BIOS versions."
The software developer, who was ultimately able to flash the firmware onto their motherboard after a support representative reportedly told him to buy a new one, added:
"At the same time, it somehow flashes the BIOS slower in regular operation than a cheap 15 MHz programmer over pogo pins, which really makes you wonder what it's doing under the hood."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by corey on Tuesday August 25, @08:50PM (5 children)
I really need to buy one of their laptops someday. Interesting products, and all Linux.
(Score: 4, Informative) by Bentonite on Wednesday August 26, @03:00AM (2 children)
I would reconsider - framework laptops are nothing special - such computers are windows laptops and a WC, except the company happens to sell replacement parts.
According to this; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Framework_Laptop?useskin=monobook#Technical_specifications [wikipedia.org] all models currently available come with "Windows 11 pre-installed", unless on order no OS is requested.
While the computers do run GNU/Linux (if you use a proprietary version of Linux, including a bunch of proprietary software for the Wi-Fi card, bluetooth card, GPU if AMD, sound card if Intel and optionally the CPU), like most modern windows laptops.
The difference between frameworks and typical windows laptops;
- They re-used CrOS's Embedded Controller software (which happens to be free software).
- Coreboot support is being developed in an experimental fashion (coreboot on such hardware doesn't do much - the digitally handcuffed proprietary init software runs and then calls coreboot and then coreboot doesn't have much to do other than maybe initing a garbage usb controller etc and then launch the payload (i.e. GNU GRUB or seabios)).
I would recommend against purchasing hardware with digitally handcuffed processors (for a lot of modern hardware, to ensure you cannot replace the proprietary malware with free software, a malicious circuit has been added to the chipset and/or processor, that refuses to boot unless the UEFI software etc matches the CPU vendors, or OEM's signature).
Digital signatures add no security at all (and rather do the opposite - preventing the user from fixing security bugs that that vendor doesn't bother to fix), unless the user is able to remove someone else's signature and add their own.
If framework was to develop a motherboard that uses an Aarch64 or RISC-V SoC and implemented actual free software support (RAMinit, GPU and other SoC compontents - with a SoC decent choice, the only functionality missing would be a lack of video hardware encoding/decoding, unless a free software implementation of the needed software was written), with free software Wi-Fi support (you can still buy AR9271 chipsets from Atheros and hook them up over PCIe), or optional Wi-Fi or other peripherials, with mPCIe and/or M.2 ports, allowing for proper GNU/Linux-libre support, there would be a reason to buy hardware from framework.
You'll get the same result by looking up what digitally handcuffed laptops coreboot supports and finding 2x used units of a supported model for a cheap price (one to use, the other for spare parts) and then flashing coreboot with an external programmer (ISP flashing is very annoying to do, although not particularity difficult).
I personally enjoy GNUbootable hardware.
(Score: 4, Informative) by remote_worker on Wednesday August 26, @07:25PM (1 child)
I've actually bought two. I got the second once I saw the RAM prices starting to go up.
I have a 13" AMD, and a 12" Intel. The RISC-V board they're developing was a developer only one at the time and had a very limited amount of RAM.
I'm running their suggested Ubuntu on the 12" (as the easiest way to get a working touch screen), and rEFInd together with FreeBSD and Linux Mint on the 13". I bought both as the "assemble it yourself" versions with no OS at all. Neither of the OSes on the 13" are proprietary or suggested by Framework. FreeBSD doesn't support the wireless ethernet chip in the 13", but I wanted wired ethernet anyways, so that isn't a problem. The one surprise I ran into is that the screen resolution on the 13" is so high that my old eyes have trouble reading the default X11 font size and I had to figure out how to set up bigger fonts :). I don't need gobs of CPU for anything and both machines have motherboards from near the low end of Framework's offerings but even so they're snappier than my 5 or 6 year old desktop. Mind you the desktop runs off spinning rust, not an SSD, so I wouldn't put too much weight on that.
All in all I'm pretty happy with them.
(Score: 3, Touché) by Bentonite on Thursday August 27, @03:44AM
Both Ubuntu and "Free"BSD are proprietary software as both come with a substantial amount of proprietary software that deny the user the 4 freedoms, regardless of if the user runs the software or not.
Sure they aren't 100% proprietary software like windows, but slowly but surely, that's being worked on (there is work being carried out to add more and more proprietary software, while pretty much no work being done to remove any).
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Wednesday August 26, @01:50PM (1 child)
The frame.work laptops and desktops are interesting things. Assuming I had any say in what I got to daily drive at work, they would be up there. As far as buying for myself, while I applaud their work, I don't want small form factor desktops or laptops at home. They're also a bit on the expensive side of life and I need as much bang for my buck in my computers as possible. However, they have an interesting business model and have kept up with the idea of swappable main boards/motherboards, parts, etc. That is not a simple task. It does create an interesting image and is a feature that just isn't there in pretty much any other laptop manufacturer.
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Bentonite on Thursday August 27, @03:56AM
It isn't a complicated task at all to sell spare parts (you merely assign a percentage of ordered parts to be spares) and design so that part replacement is reasonable to carry out (makes factory assembly easier too).
Just because many laptop companies don't sell spare parts (or do, but only at ludicrous prices) and have terrible designs that are a disaster to take apart, doesn't mean not doing that is difficult.
Even some terrible HP laptops are now designed to allow for easy battery and motherboard replacement (to make warranty replacement easier, due to their extremely high battery and motherboard failure rate and also high failure rate at warranty repair (plugging in the Wi-Fi card antennas to the replaced motherboard is too hard it seems)).
For some models, the bottom comes off with the removal of some rubber screw covers (and no stickers) and a bunch of Phillips heads and the battery is attached by 1 spring-attached screw and pulls straight out and the motherboard is also attached by a bunch of Phillips heads, which aren't too difficult to unscrew.