Adobe Considers Manufacturing Custom Processors


Adobe software has become buggy and crappy over the past few years. Creative cloud was the final nail in the coffin for me. I switched to CaptureOne and never looked back.

I don't think they should make their own processor, but instead a dedicated co-processor would be nice in the form of a video card type of device PCIe, or integrated into apple computers and some windows computers as an option. Or even as a thunderbolt connected device connected to a monitor like many of these eGPU's are doing. Or even built into certain monitors, then pc manufacturers would need to get certified to work with them.

Math Geek


thta's pretty much what i was thinking as well. unless it was so overwhelmingly powerful for adobe suite that it could be used in a rendering farm type capacity, i don't see a dedicated cpu type chip working out.

of course price is also the biggest factor. like the quadro and firepro workstation cards, many smaller companies or independents can't afford the super expensive add-on cards. and considering adobe's pricing for the suite, i doubt the card would cost less than $3-4000 starting with almost no price ceiling for extra features


Dec 28, 2011

Their software has become notoriously unreliable, forcing people to keep older versions because new versions keep introducing different bugs. The cloud model is extortion, they have not made major updates or given people a reason to upgrade otherwise. They are squeezing every last dime out of their decades old patents and tech, and I doubt very much the talent is still there to do anything different anymore. They resemble a scam company more than a software company now.

I am not in a position to switch as I use too many of their programs, but I am extremely embittered. To think they are trying to get into silicon is a complete farce. It will be the buggiest, slowest, most insecure and locked down chip ever made. I wish them nothing but disaster.


Blitz Hacker

Jul 17, 2015
I think that regardless of intel tanking lately, thinking that any sub group that isn't cpu dedicated can make any reasonable gains that will be lasting over maybe a quarter or 2 is stupidity. Intel/AMD will just have to see how they're leveraging their chip/chip sets they make themselves (adobe) and do the same thing better themselves.
Only profitable way I can see Adobe doing this is locking software to hardware, which will be a major departure. People will end up producing content on older versions as they costs won't justify the gains. Unless Adobe is getting heavily into like Rendered environments using some kind of ray tracing engine I couldn't see the market even consider the additional cost.


Jul 28, 2010
This can't be truth. I mean adobe thanks to it's almost monopoly have some of the worst software packs out there right now.
A custom made CPU can't help the blotware they are selling (oh sorry not selling, RENTING! Stupid cloud sub...).
A move like this doesn't make any sense, if they are sitting on a pile of money they can use them to make their software work...

I have switched to affinity suite now, way more efficient programs and cost a month of adobe subscription to keep for ever.


Jul 18, 2011
Sounds like a return to the early 90s, when dedicated boards for the Mac accelerated PhotoShop filters. While $3000 for a board seems like a lot, I had more than one busy graphic artist tell me it would pay for itself in just a few months if it allowed just a few extra jobs to be completed that year.
They do it because it gives them more control over their products, rather than forcing them to make their software for standard hardware.
This I agree with.

The idea is that this leads to better performance while also reducing dependence on outside companies.
That is a nice utopian ideal to strive for if human motivations were benevolent, but most large tech companies seem to operate more sociopathically.

Apple is a perfect example of this. Does anybody believe Apple will produce a custom ARM CPU that outperforms an x86 CPU from Intel or AMD? The point is tighter control over Apple products and to lock out all of the Hackintosh style machines, and at the same time unify the underlying desktop and mobile ecosystem to make Apple's development work easier. The issues of backward compatibility on the desktop taking a giant leap into the waste bin isn't exactly a step toward improving the customer experience.

Why then might Adobe look at custom hardware? Either because they want to become a yet another custom hardware vendor in the rough sea of hardware vendors, or because they want to stem the tide of migration from their software products.

This certainly won't decrease Adobe's dependence on other companies. Somebody is going to have to fab, assemble, package, and distribute any new hardware equipment, so I could easily see their dependence increasing.

Could this be a result of the subscription model not working as well as they hoped, or perhaps even working too well?
Or would it try to convince people to buy a processor specifically because they need Photoshop to run faster?
If they were selling a product to consumers, it seems less likely that it would be a processor or standard computer, and more likely that it would be a specialized portable device. Perhaps something along the lines of the Wacom Pen Computers, only built with a focus on running Adobe's Creative Cloud. It could simply be something for the server side of things though, seeing as their software is now based around an online subscription service with cloud storage.