I never understand this justification. If the tech does not allow, then don't do it if it's against your own core value. Instead, they join the quick cash grab AI-train.

You can get DIMMs that do 8000 right now, and LPCAMM2 should become capable of even higher speeds even though it's "only" 7500 at the moment.

Framework says in their blog post that they talked to AMD about using LPCAMM2 and the engineers "finally concluded that it was in fact not possible without massively downclocking the memory". And okay, I believe them, but I'm pointing my blame a lot closer to the CPU than the memory modules.

If they made the computer unupgradable it would defeat the purpose of their company.

LPCAMM2 can, its a shame Framework couldn't make it happen.

Most people probably never upgrade their machines at all. In my case I used the same PC from 2009 until about a month ago. Over its 16 year lifespan it saw 3 GPUs, the memory was doubled from 6GB to 12GB, a Wifi card was added (and then got flakey after about 7 years but was able to switch to Ethernet over coax with MoCa), and an SSD was added for hosting the OS and most apps (original HDD relegated to additional storage).

If you're planning for a 10-12 year lifespan I have this advice. CPUs have surprising longevity these days as most usages don't significantly tax them, go a little above mid range on core count and it should last. GPUs are a throwaway item, plan to replace them every 3-5 years to stay current. Storage can be something that's worth adding if you're planning for a long lifespan and depending on usage. Photos, video, and games use more storage than they used to but personal photos and videos largely live in the cloud now. RAM you might need to upgrade if you go midrange but might not if you aim higher than standard in the initial build. The buses and interfaces become the main limiting factors to longevity. RAM technology will advance, PCIe and USB will have new versions. There may be new standards you can't take advantage of, like I was still on SATA II when the world had since moved on to SATA III and then NVMe.

Sometimes it's more about repairability than upgradability. My stuff lasted but I've had HDDs, PSUs, and fans die in the past. It's nice to be able to replace a dead part and move on.

I will also say that I'm a little surprised that the enthusiast market is still mostly these big ATX mid tower cases. They feel massive and unnecessary today when 5.25" bays are obsolete and storage is not 3.5" HDDs but an m.2 chips that sit flush with the motherboard. The smaller form factors are still the exception. Is it all to support the biggest and baddest high end GPUs that cost more than the rest of the system?

Framework's whole reputation is based on upgradeable, modular design right? It's certainly surprising to me that their desktop seems to be the opposite of that.

There is a part salvage factor to consider. If one can pull the drive, they can attempt to send it out for data recovery or wipe it for resale. If they can also pull the RAM, they can recover more costs.

Please don't turn this site into Slashdot or Reddit. You can make your point without being rude.

It requires soldered memory because no one makes LPCAMM2 modules for LPDDR5x

"because it's unified" is definitely not the reason.