• The Hobbyist
    link
    fedilink
    English
    661 year ago

    The battery life in arstechnica’s review stands out as different and lower compared to 2 other reviews (pcgamer and techradar):

    https://lemmy.zip/comment/3284894

    It might be due to the use of the USB-A ports on the backside of the laptop which are known to have some abnormal power draw, which framework is currently addressing.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      English
      71 year ago

      Do they now have additional USB ports on the back side? Or do you refer to having USB modules plugged in?

      • @Abbrahan
        link
        English
        101 year ago

        They were talking about the usb modules. The back two on either side (the ones closest to the screen) have an issues where the USB 4 Type C to USB A adapter is not fully going to sleep when nothing is plugged in. So ArsTechnica’s reviewer most likely had one of the USB A modules plugged into those two USB 4 ports which causes their apparent poor battery life.

        • The Hobbyist
          link
          fedilink
          English
          5
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Indeed. On both the picture at the top of the article and at the bottom, do we see them having the USB-A expansion card in the slot closest to the screen. If that’s how it was configured for the battery test, it would show battery life in a non-optimal configuration.

          Edit: this is only an issue on the AMD board.

          • @Abbrahan
            link
            English
            41 year ago

            I believe Framework said they are looking into fixes for this issue, either with firmware patches or if neccesary a hardware revision of the USB A module. Current workaround is just to not put USB A into those two back slots.