i7 or i9 for lightroom

If your workflow includes other software packages (we have similar articles for Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop), you need to consider how the system will perform in those applications as well. The Core i9 9900K is approximately 20% more expensive than the Core i7 8700K, but in exchange we saw a 15-20% performance increase in Photoshop. I am currently looking for a new computer and don't know which CPU to take. thanks Rob Thank you! Even with SMT ON, I'm back to short export times (or "Save Images" times)! Even if the exporting performance still isn't on par with AMD, it is also possible that these new processors will be significantly faster for active tasks like scrolling through images, switching modules, applying adjustments, etc, which may make them ideal for photographers that do heavier edits on a smaller number of images. Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. @Reid: yes, that would be my personal opinion. Any less, like 6 cores (12 threads) or 4 cores (8 threads) yields slower results. CPU utilization we typically don't log during these benchmarks since from a performance perspective, it is often more misleading then helpful. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic and that performance will vary widely in different applications. Mac, Lightroom, i5 or i9? The Intel i7-8700K six-core processor looks like the best value, but there have been numerous reports of poor performance with six or more core based systems. Any thoughts on whether the 2.3 ghz 9th generation i9 8 core processors will be worth the extra money over the 2.6 ghz 9th gen i7 6 core processors? And saving/export slowed down significantly. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each test, we also like to provide the individual results for you to examine. Les processeurs ont tous fonctionné à la même vitesse d'horloge. With your CPU having 6 cores and 12 threads, running all of those is apparently better than just running the 6 cores without HT/SMT. While the Intel Core i9 9990XE achieved a higher overall benchmark score in Lightroom Classic than any other CPU we tested, that doesn't mean it is an automatic pick even assuming you can get your hands on it. Money/quality wise, of course the most expensive one would be the best. Interesting, Jayz2cents had much better results oc'ing the 9900K compared to the 8700K: https://youtu.be/9yQRmbe2QPU. My current config is i7 6700K oc to 4.4GHz / GTX 750 / 16GB RAM / m.2 ssd for system / sata ssd for Adobe cache / hdd for photos. By reading on this sub about undervolting I thought I'd give it a try and oh my, what a difference it makes! Between AMD and INtel, if you have a similar number of cores I don't think you should see all that different of CPU load unless there is an issue with your system. Close • Posted by 1 hour ago. I did some tests importing RAW files and generating smart previews in Lightroom, which maxed out the i7 pretty well. For these tasks, the Intel 10th Gen processors take the lead with the Intel Core i9 10900K and i5 10700K beating the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and 3800X by a small 5% respectively. Because of this, we decided to manually set the PL1 and PL2 power limits in the BIOS. Are these 24 files we can see on the LR screenshot? In order to see how each of these configurations performs in Lightroom Classic, we will be using our PugetBench for Lightroom Classic V0.9 benchmark and Lightroom Classic 2020 (9.3). Where the current top-end consumer Core i7 CPU (the Core i7 8700K) has only 6 cores and a max Turbo of 4.7 GHz, the Core i7 9700K and i9 9900K both have 8 cores and a 4.9-5.0 GHz max Turbo frequency. Close to that results is the 8 cores and 16 threads setup (SMT ON but manually turning half the cores off). The new i7 9700K and i9 9900K are certainly good for Lightroom Classic CC, but they are only about 5% faster than the i7 8700K on average. HOWEVER, to complicate things more, there was also an Adobe update right after I installed the new RAM. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. The bulk tasks like exporting and generating smart previews are where we expected these CPUs to shine and while they were ~10% faster than the i7 8700K, we honestly thought we would see a larger difference. Same slow stuff :(. I was excited when the 8-core chips were announced, but I can't justify making an upgrade due to the launch price and thermals. Photoshop and Lightroom benefit little from an expensive GPU. profile (2800 MHz and 3200 MHz respectively), no stability issues. We've done some testing with more photos and while it took longer to complete, it seems to be pretty pretty linear after you have more than just a few to export. This is nowhere near some of the top of the line graphics cards that we had discussed here. I am a professional photographer, I use my laptop mainly for photo editing (Photoshop and Lightroom) - no video editing whatsoever. Je suis en réflexion pour me monter une tour PC pour mes retouches photos (Photoshop) et tris/archives (Lightroom). Thanks Matt. The new, slower results came after the update (I did downgrade to earlier versions of the Adobe apps to try, but still the same slow speed). Thanks! However, things are a bit different for active tasks like scrolling through images, switching modules and applying adjustments. Granted, I did not roll-back Lightroom, but I thought if Photoshop and Camera Raw roll-back didn't do the trick, I wouldn't try Lightroom. For reasons, I prefer to buy a Mac over a Windows PC (advertising ID, rest of family on Apple, iMessage, etc) You should notice the biggest difference in tasks like exporting and generating previews, but when navigating around the Library and Develop modules there is very little difference. Considering the additional clock speed on top of that, if you're not overclocking, I think it comes back down to hyper-threading. Overall, this will likely make the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a more attractive option for most Lightroom Classic users, although if exporting is not at all a problem in your workflow, the Intel 10th Gen processors can be a great choice as well. In this article, we will be examining the performance of the new Intel 10th Gen Core i9 10900K, i7 10700K, and i5 10600K in Lightroom Classic compared to a range of CPUs including the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, Intel X-10000 Series, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, as well as the previous generation Intel 9th Gen processors. Adobe Lightroom Classic is an interesting application when it comes to CPU performance since it has some very interesting performance quirks - chief among them the fact that AMD processors are overwhelming faster than Intel for a number of tasks like exporting and generating smart previews. But any more, like 12 cores and 24 threads also yields slower than ideal results. The 8700 is currently 100 € cheaper than the 9700k, is it worth 100 € more? To start off our analysis of the Intel 10th Gen desktop processors we are going to look at the performance in Lightroom Classic versus AMD's 3rd Gen Ryzen processors. It isn't by a small amount either - AMD can at times be up to 2x faster than a similarly priced Intel CPU! The new Core i9 9900K was at the top, but it was only a few percent faster than the i7 8700K which is likely within the margin of error for those tests. will you ever do a Benchmarking for Capture one? That's true. It's definitely not the 32 vs 64 GB, since my export time before the RAM upgrade was consistently about 4:45 with my 4 x 8 = 32GB setup (4x8Gb Adata XPG Z1 2800 C17). For a few weeks my batch of 64 heavily edited test images (from Sony A7RIII, 42mp .ARW files) consistently took 4 min 45 seconds to save. It is technically the fastest CPU we have tested for navigating around the modules and photo merge tasks, but if you are looking for the best export performance you may be better served with a Threadripper 1920X or a Core i9 7900X or higher CPU instead. Thank you! So could it be because of going from 4 sticks of ram to 2? I don't recommend overclocking, but if that is your goal you will have much better results with the 9000 series because of the better thermal interface material it has compared to the 8000 series (including the 8086). 90% sure. It will be helpful.But my main thought, or assumption was such: May be CPU utilization in AMD Ryzen 2700X during export (which may take many hours for thousands of pictures) not 99%, as in I7 processors (definitely for I7-2600K), but just 60-70-80 % ? Is it possibble to know average CPU utilization during the test? Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X ($749) Maybe the 8700 is still the best bet? In essence, a score of "90" would mean that it gave 90% the performance of the reference system while a score of "110" would mean it was 10% faster. Next time I will be upgrading is in 5-7 years. If your software does use hyper-threading effectively, it'll be a more even match. Clockspeeds are similar; around 4.2 GHz for the active cores (no matter if 16-core mode or 8-core mode). For most users, this makes the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a much better overall choice for a Lightroom Classic workstation. Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6GHz / 4.9GHz Turbo, Eight Core –> 132% Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6GHz / 5.0GHz Turbo, Eight Core –> 135% Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan However, I noticed that certain demanding active tasks are faster in the brand new ACR 12.3, such as adjusting an image after auto mask was already applied. And I just wondering, does the Ryzen R72700X have the same CPU utilization - about 100%, or less (may be 90%..or may be even 80%?). The “Pentium” series is a tier below also aimed at desktop users, the “Celeron” series is mainly aimed at mobile devices, and the “Xeon” series is tailored exclusively for servers and professional users. The scores shown in the chart above are relative to the best possible performance for each task with a Core i7 8700K CPU and a NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti 8GB GPU. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark result/analysis sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion section. I'm not too concerned about the overclocking. However, Lightroom Classic currently heavily favors AMD processors for passive tasks like exporting which allows the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3800X to be around 25-30% faster than the Core i9 10900K and i7 10700K respectively. The TIM is definitely better on the 9th gen, but the thicker silicon with the extra two cores result in overall worse performance. Lightroom CC disgustingly slow - old issue, NEED ANSWERS. To thoroughly test each processor, we will be using two sets of images: one set of 22MP.CR2 RAW images taken on a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and a set of 45MB .NEF RAW images taken on a Nikon D850. 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. On average, the Core i7 9700K is about 4% faster that the Core i7 8700K in Lightroom Classic. These characteristics, together with an IPC (instructions per cycle) number, determine how well a processor performs. At first I wanted to take the i7 8700, but then considered the i7 9700k, because it's so much faster at building smart previews. And I've just tested the same batch now with SMT OFF. For these types of tasks, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is on average about 35% faster than the new Intel Core i9 10900K while the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is 23% faster than the Intel Core i7 10700K. Puget Systems offers a range of powerful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. And I know that some of the folks in videos like the one you posted above have that in mind. With the launch of the new 9th Gen Intel Core Processors, Intel has made a number of improvements including a small frequency bump and an increase in core count. Performance is very good and the OLED is simply stunning! If you got the same time with 24 files, then there is probably a difference in export settings. So, my question is - how much I will benefit (in terms of exporting time) from upgrading to one of theses cpus? That way, anytime you launch Lightroom it can automatically have the affinity set to leave 1 or 2 cores unused for multitasking. We just already had a bunch of results already on Z370 before that board came in so we stuck with it rather than having to re-run a bunch of testing. My understanding that for Lightroom the speed of the processor is important (got that) and that LR does not effectively use multiple cores. However, I do understand that Puget are system integrators, and their primary interest is system stability, so it's not likely that they will test under these conditions. However, I personally think that the ideal situation will be when Intel is putting out CPUs that offer maximum performance without needing any more overclocking. If you are interested in how these processors compare in other applications, we also have other articles for Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, and several other applications available on our article listing page. The "Number of cores / threads" graph shows the number of cores (darker area). In my case there seems to be a sweet spot; running 16 cores and no SMT. But this was only one quick test, and only some geometry adjustments. So apparently, it does matter, at least on my computer, whether I use Lightroom, ACR, etc. Between the Intel 10th Gen and AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen CPUs, most users are likely going to want an AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processor due to their significantly better performance in tasks like exporting. Still, I quickly tested a Geometry test with an Auto Mask layered A7RIII image with SMT ON and OFF. So on Thursday I'll see if that changes anything. Photoshop Lightroom (standalone) is very slow. That said, I would expect your system to export the same images/settings we used in somewhere around 70-80 seconds. I turned SMT off and my test export/save time set a new shortest time record. One additional thing to note though, the new 9000 Series CPUs may be somewhat hard to find for a while. That is why we keep it on for our testing - most people will likely be willing to take the hit in export times in order to make the active tasks a bit faster. Be sure to check our list of Hardware Articles to keep up to date on how all of these software packages (and more) perform with the latest CPUs. Feel free to skip to the next section for our analysis of these results.

Veranstaltungen Hannover Kinder Heute, Bobcat Bensheim Mietpark, Amd A10 7850k Gaming Performance, Die Krone Der Dunkelheit 2 Hörbuch, Arena Verlag Manuskript, Vitamine Für Frauen Ab 60 Test, Atypical Season 3, Altkölnischer Hof Bacharach öffnungszeiten,