If Ryzen is out of the question it now comes down to overclocked 7700k vs overclocked 6800k? SMT is something we tested across a bunch of software packages a few years ago and at the time we didn't see any significant differences. All I need is 10-bit support to run my 10-bit monitors. Thanks Matt. Adobe & AMD work closely so we'll likely see improved performance in coming weeks. In this article, we will be looking at how the new AMD Ryzen 7 1700X and 1800X perform in Lightroom compared to Intel's top 4, 6, 8, and 10 core CPUs. Interestingly, the difference between the two Ryzen CPUs was just a small 1% for this task so if you do decide to use Ryzen and primarily care about export times, you might as well save money and use the Ryzen 7 1700X. This is why Ryzen 3900x blows away the 9900k in that task. Unless, I understand the detailed results wrong, see below:- (a slight critique from my side) in the detailed result tables the results are a little confusing: I understand that results for particular raw file types and processors are given as time (seconds?) Jedec memory is C20-C22-C24 and 1.2V.Or use XMP for both systems with like 2666C12 for intel (not c19 crap like now), or find at last jedec spec 3200 memory for AMD system. Perhaps 3800x>3900x by benchmark is a good indicator of 3900x>3950x improvement? In these tasks, the Ryzen 9 3900X is about 80% faster than the Core i9 9900K while the Ryzen 7 3700X/3800X are about 55% faster than the Core i9 9700K. Not making excuses for Adobe specifically here, just explaining that the idea that "everything should use all the cores!" We've tried to figure out a good method to benchmark exactly that, but couldn't figure out a good way. I'm curious if disabling SMT and/or using the High Performance (or Ryzen Balanced) power profiles would change the results? Hey, you are running XMP overclocked memory on AMD, and stock jedec crap on Intel. The AMD Ryzen 9 3950X has a $749 launch price, against the Intel Core i9 9900K 8 Core price of $499, so it really is up to users to define if they need the extra speed introduced by AMD’s processor. Spherical Projection, No Crop. Let me setup a bit of context here: I'm in events photography where high multitasking efficiency is very desirable. This does still mean that our testing is a bit biased in favor of Ryzen since we decided to stick with DDR4-2666 for the Intel and AMD Threadripper platforms, but as you will see in the final results, that extra performance in a couple of tests is not really going to change our conclusions so we are not too worried about it. Even then, however, we only use boards that have TB integrated onto the boards. If you are concerned about general Lightroom performance, the Intel Core i7 7700K is significantly faster for most tasks and only ~10% slower when exporting images. Phoronix's Darktable-on-Linux benchmarks ought not to be a too dissimilar CPU challenge, and there the AMD chips come out looking rather better. In this article we will be examining how the new Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X CPUs on X299 compare to the previous generation Intel CPUs and AMD's Ryzen CPUs … I wonder why these folks who are "complaining that we are making them under-perform" don't also say they have run into stabity problems like Puget has discovered. File copying didn't seem affected, but maybe that was unfair since both systems have extremely fast NVMe drives so that wasn't really something that would take long anyway :). If I were to guess based on pure specs, renders in Premiere might be a few seconds faster with the newer P4000, but in Photoshop, performance will be virtually the same. Chrome, YouTube, file explorer Windows) is all it takes to feel the big difference :). - Do you think the benchmark for Develop Auto WB & Tone is representative of overall "slider responsiveness" in the develop module? There were some that we covered in our later article: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . The only caveat is that for many of the active tasks in Lightroom Classic (scrolling through images, switching between modules, etc. If you use 4 sticks, it is either 2933 or 2677 depending on whether the RAM is single or dual rank. We have updated results looking at a range of CPUs in Lightroom including the Ryzen CPUs using the latest BIOS, drivers, and version of Lightroom: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . Not the end of the world, just requires some patience. Of course, if you are building your own system it might not be a big deal since you are probably willing to do some memory diagnostics if you ever have a problem but for us, that isn't really something our typical customer wants to do in the middle of their workday. We have been doing testing with all three of these speeds since these chips launched, and I can tell you for sure that running the RAM at 3200Mhz is definitely a bit less stable if using four sticks, and it gets worse if you go beyond spec to 3600MHz. The images and settings we used in our testing were: 18MP (5184x3456) I believe I am more concerned with "Active Tasks" or seeing results as I edit. PUGET technical folks really know their stuff :). Its true about GPU use on PS/LR that Adobe doesn't tap hope that changes. I'm still able to jump to a different catalogue, start making my picks, possibly even do some light editing (slightly slower ofc but doable). Based on Gamers Nexus recent youtube video on Ryzen memory tuning, gains of 8-10% are possible using 3866 c16 downclocked to 3800 and 1900mhz FCLOCK. 1700x - Same scenario - 100% CPU utilisation on all cores - machine feels fully loaded with tasks, unresponsive in general.Can't do any other selections etc. I'm also holding off for a bit in case they launch a new version at Adobe MAX in a few weeks that changes anything. Its really hard to know what makes the difference considering how different AMD's CPU architecture is from Intel's. AMD and Microsoft report there are no scheduler issues with Ryzen. It's be interesting to see what the results would be if you were to script up parallel instances of Adobe's DNG converter to do the same 100 conversions. ... #Puget #Benchmark #Ryzen. Now, however, we have and are currently planning on offering DDR4-3200 for our customers once JEDEC 3200MHz RAM is readily available so we will be doing our testing with that speed of RAM. This should give way more bang for the bucks. As far as the Intel X-series and AMD Threadripper processors go, there honestly isn't much to talk about. And in some cases - primarily exporting and building smart previews - the Ryzen CPUs get … - Do you think 3rd gen Ryzen using gen 4 NVME would change any of these results meaningfully? In this article, we will primarily be looking at how well the new Ryzen 3600, 3700X, 3800X, and 3900X perform in Lightroom Classic. Intel is simply able to achieve much higher performance for similar or much lower cost. In Adobe Lightroom Classic, the Intel Core 10th Gen processors such as the i9 10900K and i7 10700K do very well in active tasks like scrolling through images and switch modules - coming in at about 5% faster than a similarly priced AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen CPU. (seems petty to me) There are some memory bandwidth issues, but as noted that is more related to the DDR being used. The subjective "snappier" interface feel is suspect, IMO. Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: *All the latest drivers, OS updates, BIOS, and firmware applied as of July 2nd, 2019. I would suggest looking over out "How much faster is a modern workstation for Lightoom" article as well: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . The Ryzen 7 5800X does not do quite as well, but still manages to barely out-score the Intel Core i9 10900K by 1%. It is very difficult to do subjective testing like that, at least in an automated / repeatable fashion. That is really, really hard to test consistently and accurately, especially when comparing CPUs where the difference is likely going to be minimal. Some we saw decent gains, others almost nothing at all: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . On the flip side, the Intel Hyperthreading (HT) and AMD SMT issue are still very much present - you can read the details about it in our support post Hyperthreading & SMT causing low performance in Lightroom Classic. As this was tested on Windows 10, would it be possible to test on Windows 7, or possibly when MS fix the scheduling bug which is hitting Ryzen performacne? Se você exporta um número alto de imagens todos os dias e tem o orçamento, os AMD Threadripper … I'm actually not 100% sure when we will have the Lr benchmark up for download, but probably in the next couple months. Auto Align, Auto Tone, No Deghost, 11x 18MP RAW (5184x3456) However, if you are concerned about export times the "High End" Core i7 CPUs were anywhere from 40-60% faster than Ryzen so using one of those CPUs would likely be a much better choice. The app is scalable. Other reviews show the Ryzen CPUs being extremely good for encoding video (Cinebench). I was wondering will you guys be doing a follow up test with the new Lightroom Classic? Greater Salt Lake City Area Software Engineer at Xylem, Inc Information Technology and Services Education Utah State University 2005 — 2008 PhD Candidate, Management Information Systems Utah State University 2004 — 2005 MS, Business Information Systems … Whenever a new generation of CPUs is launched, the main question everyone wants answered is how fast they are. This limits the Ryzen platform to 64GB of RAM while the other platforms had 128GB, but since our Lightroom Classic benchmark never needs more than 32GB of RAM to run, this does not affect performance at all. - we will be basing the majority of our conclusions with HT/SMT disabled in the instances that it improves performance. Thunderbolt on PC is inconsistent enough even on fully certified platforms that I would highly recommend against using Thunerbolt on X570. Thanks - great article.Export is definitely the task which I feel like I'm waiting around for most (i.e. Getting micro-stutters if I absolutely try to shift to doing anything else up the the point where it's possible to freeze the machine. is not valid. I might do a 'light' overclock but has there been any change in terms of ACTIVE tasks with the latest version of LR?Just how noticeable are the active tasks between an i7 9700k and say an AMD equivalent?In my case passive tasks aren't an issue. Overall, Ryzen still isn't a good match for Lightroom even with the performance improvements. Especially the export benchmarks? Which one feels more responsive under heavy load. Disk speed is just not a factor even with 500MB/s SATA SSDs, so going from a 3.5GB/s Gen3 NVMe drive to one that is up 7GB/s really isn't going to do much. Ryzen 3 is not the same as Ryzen 3rd gen.Title says "Intel 9th gen"(which is also not completely correct), but "Ryzen 3" and "Threadripper 2"... Ryzen 3000 is indeed third gen Ryzen. Greater Salt Lake City Area Embedded Systems Engineer Computer Hardware Education Utah State University 1988 — 1992 BS, Electical Engineering Experience Beijer Electronics, Inc. August 2008 - … We hope to have things ready pretty shortly after launch, but it all depends on exactly when the launch is. There was a new patch for Ryzen from Adobe in Premiere Pro that boosted the performance. I love stabilty. So it is just a matter of which of those kinds of tasks are more important for you (from a performance standpoint at least). Maybe one of AMD's engineers could figure out what makes the difference, but in the end what really matters is actual real-world performance. If so I'd still be keen to pick up the Intel over the AMD due to that efficiency while exports are running. It could be dual vs quad channel RAM (although if that was it I would expect even worse performance from the i7 7700K) or it could be Intel-specific software optimization (but then I would expect better 7700K performance). You may get lucky and it will work with whatever specific device you happen to be using, but it is more likely that it won't work quite right. ), the Intel 9th gen processors do still hold a slight lead. ), you need to consider how the processor will perform in all those applications. On the "low" end, the Ryzen 5 3600 ranges from 70% to more than 2x faster than the Core i5 9600K! Be sure to install the new AMD Radeon Pro Adrenalin Edition Driver with it! If it's less than 15% .. i wouldnt go all the trouble. What was the resolution of the monitor? This is a short tutorial/comparison video on how to run run Puget After Effects Benchmark. If I had to give a guess, probably late November. And let's say it: Thanks AMD for new competition in the CPU market. Has there been any updates to LR CC that help Ryzen performance since this article was published? 1:1 previews are full resolution, so 5184x3456 in our case. Programs like Photoshop and Lightroom deliver the best performance when they’re paired with generalist processors, like the Ryzen … I'm totally aware this is not something scientific but nevertheless super valuable. Lightroom still makes very little use of GPUs and is more dependent on your CPU and the type of harddrive you're running it on. ECC RAM is what we use in our X99 workstations that is what we wanted to test with. Smart previews are always 2560px on the longest side I believe, and ours ended up with a final resolution of 2560x1707. I have a lot of issues with my graphics hardware and laptop in general with Lightroom. When AMD released the first of their 3rd generation Ryzen processors back in July 2019, they were quickly established as the fastest processors for Adobe Lightroom Classic. I edit 2-4k pics monthly too, culling through at least 20k - on a mobile i5-4278U (2.6ghz). Ryzen has seen about a 7% increase in performance since this article was published, but it looks like this is from general optimizations than anything AMD specific since Intel also saw performance gains. I'll be at Adobe MAX in a few weeks as well, which could potentially throw a wrench in things if the launch happens to be right around the same time. Puget Systems. As I understood, higher scores is better, right? Our benchmark was not as good as we wanted it to be and we wanted some time to further develop it. Thank you so much! 4 slots populated with 16GB modules each gives a maximum of 64GB. Not perfect, but certainly more accurate than making a wild guess. Since Reg. My observation on 9900K vs 1700x (not exactly a direct competitor but they have similar export/rendering power) is as follows: 9900K - Renders a timelapse with LRtimelpse from ~600 RAW files (files from A7III downscaling to 4K). CUDA is great, but still has limited app support. If Adobe can get it's head out regarding … For quite a while now Intel has held a dominant position in nearly every computing market, but there is a lot of hype around Ryzen due to the fact that you can get eight CPU cores for half the cost of an Intel processor of the same size. Before you build a machine, check out their blog posts and tests … I'm not sure how the numbers scale to time. http://wccftech.com/amd-ryz... We aren't planning on testing with Windows 7 at this point since Windows 7 no longer has mainstream support from Microsoft and the existing supply has nearly dried up to the point that we soon won't be able to sell it on our workstations at all. John, I haven't personally used P4000, but I came from the K4000 and migrated over to AMD for the WX 7100 and Ryzen 7 1800x. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. that is exactly what i would to like to know too... i dont care waiting for export a little longer, when i can do meanwhile other tasks smoothly.Planning to upgrade from i7 quad to i9 9900k wit GB z390 designare with 64-128gb, reading this article doubting if maybe amd would be worth it.....the choice would be easier if the HT?SMT issue would be solved. Just remember, this is not free performance - it is overclocking and has many of the same stability risks associated with something like CPU or GPU overclocking. Awesome, thanks so much for everything! Information on the Utah State University - contacts, students, faculty, finances. Be sure to check our list of Hardware Articles for the latest information on how these CPUs perform with a variety of software packages. It is definitely an interesting question that I would love to know the answer to, though. Overall, Ryzen still isn't a good match for Lightroom even with the performance improvements. I'd be super happy to get any kind of additional information about it! Since this is a completely new platform that is still getting uefi/bios updates specifically addressing memory, would it be best to take out some of the memory? Import a lot of files, color correction, then export a lot of high resolution files to jpeg. Since the results for exporting images was quite a bit different than the other Lightroom tasks we tested, we decided to separate our average CPU performance chart into two categories: exporting images and "everything else". I did feel more lag when doing stuff on the internet, compared to what I am used to on systems with no active CPU load, but YouTube videos even at HD were perfectly smooth and the delays waiting for pages to load were not obnoxious. Happy Compute! I'm surprised at just how poor the benefit of extra cores is to some of the tests, such as the DNG conversion or preview generation. I'm not actually 100% sure to be honest. Doesn't matter how fast the drive is if the CPU/RAM is the bottleneck. I know that a 6 AMD would give me at 60-100% increased performance in "pasive" tasks (1:1 previews, smart previews and exporting) but i wonder how much performance i'd get on active tasks. Recommended Systems For: Adobe After Effects; ... Ryzen Workstations based on AMD Ryzen B550 and X570; ... is using three Puget Systems … Gen4 PCIe I doubt will have any influence on Lightroom performance. Since the installation of the Fall Creators Update, Microsoft has been pushing AMDx64-specific updates which seem to be improving stability & performance as well. Auf welchem Niveau ist die GPU-Beschleunigung einer Ryzen APU (konkret: 4650G) in Lightroom/Photoshop zu erwarten? It really depends on if your work is going to be more CUDA dominant or OpenCL. High performance mode is actually what we default to during benchmarks, but the difference between it and balanced shouldn't be much as long as the system isn't idle for too long. The X-series CPUs did fairly well for the passive tasks, but outside a few specific tests, none of them were able to fully match the Ryzen 9 3900X. Puget Systems' testing of Lightroom seems to indicate that multiple cores (up to around 8) do seem to help with performance. Habe bisher mit einer dedizierten Grafikkarte (GTX 1050, als 2GB … Great article. By all accounts, it does seem that AMD might have been better off delaying the launch by a month. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. I would try to stick to a GTX 1050 or above if you can though. So the only way to prevent the 9900K from being run into the ground by the 3900X is by disabling HT, and thus crippling it badly for all other applications you use - including the OS itself. In fact, that means that the Ryzen 5 3600 is faster than even the Core i9 9900K for these two tasks! Thank you for nice comparison! You guys are the only ones that do these kind of test in the business and are uniquely placed to do them fairly easy (I hope). Different story here. ... 2019 iMac Pro vs 2019 Custom PC by Puget Systems: Lightroom … We also have a number of other articles looking at the performance of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X CPUs in other applications including: To see how the new AMD Ryzen CPUs perform in Lightroom, we will be testing with the following hardware: Intel Core i7 6850K 3.6GHz If someone had errors, they might not jump to suspecting their RAM speed. And because you do that, it automatically means that every photographer does the same thing! We try to compensate by running the benchmark multiple times and taking the best overall run, but you still get those kinds of discrepancies. 3200 c16 is truly bottom of the barrel for Ryzen. Instead of 64GBs @ 2400MHz maybe try 16 or 32GBs @ 3200 (or best speed possible). Even if it is a few percent slower in some situations, just a handful of crashes across our customer base due to using out-of-spec memory would cause more time (and maybe data!) And exactly as you've mentioned opening a few tabs here and there (eg. needed to perform a task (the lower the better), but the scores are... well, scores (the higher the better) - this is a little confusing as there is no clear explanation of this in the table. Anyway, my next machine will be based on AMD then :) thanks again for your effort, this test is a real benchmark of how CPU should be really tested in software... 1) Yes, GPU acceleration is pretty much always enabled in our testing unless otherwise noted. I wonder how much those results translate. The second one I created from the chart on their website which has a ton of HEDT CPUs included too(I omitted them). Hmm, too bad there are no tests for changing the controls (white balance, noise reduction, etc) and for working with brushes - which is what I'm mostly concerned about. Monopolies like Adobe do not really spend time on optimization. I recommend the Adrenalin Edition (Non-Enterprise version). Worst case, it shouldn't be more than a week or two after launch that we have at least most of our articles up. GPU performance is definitely something we want to look at in the future, but since display resolution is apparently a big factor, we will have to also test things like HD vs 4K, multiple displays, etc. Hi Matt, after many bios and drivers updates, Ryzen performance has increased overall. I would like to see if the performance gains from both Intel and AMD. But I also feels like the time I spend working in LR makes it gradually more sluggish, even when I still have many GB's of RAM free - so if that's actually the case, then testing that might be even more complicated. Which test would be show exporting performance of Canon DPP (from RAW to 8 bit TIFF)? 19. From there, we normalized all our results to the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X to help give us a clear idea of how these new AMD CPUs compare to Intel's offerings. That should be plenty of time for them to get everything fixed. Really happy that the bottlenecks are removed for AMD, as they look even better now with the 3800 - 3950 series. Does the performance on Smart previews reflect the performance of 1:1 previews ? I assume they have....correct? It has 25% more cores and boost clocks are a bit higher at 4.7Ghz. Por lo menos según esta prueba de Puget Systems, una empresa especializada en el montaje de PCs de alta gama, que ha realizado tests comparando los nuevos MacBook Air y Pro con chip Apple M1 con dos estaciones de trabajo PC con procesadores AMD de última generación.. Puget eligió dos PC de escritorio equipados con AMD Ryzen 7 5800X y Ryzen … Would this not explain, in part, the performance improvements? Do you expect to be able to publish results for the new chips shortly after launch? My impression is that the relative performance between different CPU models should be similar, but again I can't be 100% sure at the moment. Wait - save - upgrade higher. These are absolutely amazing results, but it is worth pointing out that for most of the "active" tests, such as scrolling through images and switching between modules, the Intel 9th gen processors are a bit faster than AMD. And in some cases - primarily exporting and building smart previews - the Ryzen CPUs get close to twice the performance! If you only use Lightroom occasionally, they will certainly do the job, but definitely not optimal. Hmm, that's a shame. (3.5-4GHz Turbo) 8 Core As for the 6800K vs 7770K, it is hard to say for certain if you plan to overclock. The 3rd generation Ryzen processors are terrific for Lightroom Classic and were on average about 20% faster than a similarly priced Intel 9th gen processor. Too bad the Intel K chips weren't OCed in these tests. Could Ryzen's dual channel memory (Intel broadwell-e is quad channel) be the reason for its bad export performance? This limits the Ryzen platform to 64GB of RAM ", It looks like Matt was using 3200MHz memory for the Ryzen platform in this test, and currently the largest memory modules available at that speed are 16GB. But I appreciate your effort and still wish you best of luck in finding those new testing methods! are limited to 1 thread in critical functions. From my understanding it doesn't can anyone comment on this? However, if LR needs 18GB and you are choosing between 32GB of higher frequency RAM vs 64GB of safer RAM then it is really just a call between more performance but higher risk of failure versus a bit lower performance but more reliable and safer long-term (less need for upgrades). With these kinds of real-world tests, anything around 5% or less you should really consider the same. For each platform, we used the maximum amount of RAM that is both officially supported and available at the frequency we tested. Thanks for the reply. Because the HT/SMT issue is so dramatic - it almost doubles export times in some cases! Thank you so much for the faster response, what you said is exactly what I have been finding online and it is hard to find review on workstation cards in relationship to Adobe suites. The reason behind this is simply that previously, we did not have Ryzen fully qualified as an entire platform and were not comfortable running the RAM beyond the official specifications. Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. I've personally noticed a huge difference in between AMD and Intel (Ryzen 1700x and 9900K) in how it handles situations where CPU is at 100% load already. Would a mid-range GPU of 2gb be enough or would i need something much more powerful? So for those people, the few percent better "responsiveness" is worth it since the export performance doesn't matter at all to them. Remember his Mb was Gigabyte X570.Maximum Memory is 3200 Mhzhttps://www.pugetsystems.co... No, it is oveclocked xmp memory. I think that is really a call that each person has to make for themselves, but I personally would go with the higher capacity. Hi William, thank you for taking the time to respond. Since nobody knows if/when adobe is going to improve their multicore performance, the 7700k is a solid option, since it's cheaper and performs better than ryzen cpu's. For Lightroom, we would typically recommend a high frequency quad core CPU (like the Core i7 7700K) since most tasks in Lightroom are not able to take advantage of a higher number of CPU cores. loss than the amount that would be saved by having faster RAM. I keep zooming in and out and that's where I lose most of my time. It's so fresh that it hasn't been fully optimized yet. We dropped 1:1 preview testing when we switched over to using Adobe's plugin API as much as possible and you unfortunately can't tell Lightroom to generate 1:1 previews through the API for some reason. It is kind of like how much storage you have available on an SSD - if you don't have enough that is a problem, but if you have a ton of empty space it doesn't make things go faster. My typical workstation was running dual xeon processors, but needs change and I found a combination that is better suited from Puget Systems Intel Core i9 3.6 ghz, eight cores, 64GB Ram, … They probably won't, that's true, they are too lazy. I gather there's no motherboards that will actually boot with the faster memory speeds supported so potentially leaving some percentage points on the boards. If there is a specific task that is a hindrance to your workflow, examining the raw results for that task is going to be much more applicable than the total scores. It's true we didn't have to have 128GB of RAM (we could have used 64GB) but we are finding more and more that our customers are starting to go above 64GB if they can. If it's more OpenCL-heavy, I've found this generally is better supported & faster with AMD. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. I mainly intend to use the system for photo editing. Some game software was optimized for Intel products and until they get their hands on AMD, you see a loss of frames on some games. To make it even more difficult, depending on the hardware the point where it starts skipping around changes. Since our testing is the same between that article and this one, you could use the i7 3570K system in that article as a baseline to gauge relative performance. Compared to the Intel Core i9 10900X, the new Ryzen 9 5900X is 20% faster, while the Ryzen … You are right that the 7700k should feel overall snappier and is better for photo editing work in general. I thought the Gigabyte X570 AORUS Ultra supported 128 GB RAM....so why "For each platform, we used the maximum amount of RAM that is both officially supported and available at the frequency we tested. While Win7 boots just fine on Ryzen, MSFT announced you will not get Windows Updates if you do so.