Hacker News Reader

Comment by Tepix | Hacker News Reader

I think AMD offers the better bang for the buck right now and thanks to amd-osx.com it's not that hard to build a Ryzen (including Threadripper) based Hackintosh.

View on HN

Until you need to use the Adobe Suite.

So what's the problem with Adobe exactly? Is there any fix on the horizon?

Adobe products were not written to take full advantage of high thread counts not GPU bound tasks. This is why their products run much better on Intel chips because they have higher single core speeds.

In short, some software (Adobe included) makes use of features that are available on Intel processors but not on AMD. Whilst both AMD and Intel are x86-64 they do both have their own unique features. For example, on Intel you've got fast memset, which doesn't exist on AMD.

But Adobe apps run on Windows with AMD, which means they custom build/compile their apps for each OS ( which is perfectly normal ) and since Apple only deals with Intel CPU's it's understandable.

Maybe it would be better to check for CPU capabilities at runtime and have a more portable app, but what do I know, obviously Adobe PMs will not pay the cost just so some mutts can run hackintosh.

My understanding is it's actually a limitation of the Intel C++ compiler they use but I can't confirm this. On Windows it bakes in some conditionals to check if the CPU is GenuineIntel before doing some things, on macOS it doesn't bother.

Someone else in this thread mentioned there are patches available for Adobe products.

I am pretty sure that bang/buck is completely irrelevant when it comes to Apple

This isn't Apple. This is for people who want more bang for the buck and/or options

Reply on news.ycombinator.com