I’ve narrowed it down to 2 top contenders, the TR 3960X and the Zen 5900X. I was wondering if you had performed any testing using this faster memory, and whether further big gains were achievable for a modest investment. We actually just put a post up about why we are shifting to DDR4-3200 RAM on (most) of our systems: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . It’s the Mac Pro that’s *REALLY* bad. Sadly the benchmark doesn't cover one of the most important metrics for real life photographer - how long it takes to import RAWs with Standard/1:1 previews to be generated, so I know which CPU will let me work asap. The 8-core Xeon will fit but considering how much slower it is, not sure that would be an upgrade. AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Gaming Performance. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. The Lightroom benchmark is a bit finicky at times since we have to do quite a bit of the testing via external scripts, and de-focusing the Lightroom window can make things break. All of those can affect performance, and it looks like we have overall seen a performance drop of about 8% with the 9900K since that time. great job again with yours online database, but! It will probably end up being a pretty big project since we are going to have to take into account how many displays are being used as well as the resolution for each display (since that apparently is a big factor for Lightroom GPU performance). I also see bad performance in Lightroom classic where I exported from ARW to JPG 397 files (the same files with the same edit on both systems) with quality set to 80 and got these times: 7820x: 16 min 21 sek. It also gets a bit hairy for us since we are partners with many of these companies, and very few of them seem to welcome head-to-head comparisons. "Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. I really wouldn't advise going above 3200MHz though. Some of the active tasks are accelerated by LR through the GPU ... Perhaps the difference in CPU performance would be much clearer with a lower GPU.• Many Lightroom users still have a Core i7-4700K in use. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic and that performance will vary widely in different applications. Comparing applications is something we don't really try to do since there is so much more to why you would use one application over another than straight performance. Display resolution I don't have an article to back it up (yet), but from what I've seen the difference is at most 5-10%. 8.4)Overall Score: 1000Active Tasks Score: 100Passive Tasks Score: 100, I dont understand why if everything is normalized to 9900K, why the score for 9900K is not 1000 (100 active / 100 passive), Yeah, compare is really interesting.. Overall, the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X is currently the fastest CPU we have tested for Lightroom Classic, but the extra 5% performance over the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X for a 50% increase in cost is likely to be hard to justify for most users. 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 scores that our benchmark calculated. So stay tuned on that! Hey! Another factor that has changed recently is that the Gigabyte B550 Vision D motherboard - with fully certified Thunderbolt support - has launched and passed our internal qualification process. I will quote from your Lightroom benchmark procedure : How does the scoring work?The scoring system used in our benchmark is based on the performance relative to a reference system with the following specifications: Intel Core i9 9900K 8 CoreNVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB64GB of RAMSamsung 960 Pro 1TBWindows 10 (1903)Adobe Lighroom Classic CC 2019 (ver. A few notes on the hardware and software used for our testing: First, we have decided to standardize on DDR4-2933 memory for the Ryzen platform. With that being said, this is going to be a new build for me, and I plan on using it for gaming + my wife will be using it for photo editing (lightroom and some basic photoshop.) When we can, we try to have many of the tests be similar, but we first and foremost want to measure the performance for "typical" workflows in each app separately. i understood how you calculate the total score (Active + Passive)/2*10 .. One thing we do want to note is that the pre-launch BIOS that is available for Ryzen motherboards is using AGESA 1.0.8. And 4) Lastly, AMD is saying that the TR socket will be compatible with future Treadrippers… If the 2 CPU’s are close already, does that push the TR over the top to make it that worth the added expense? The second thing to note is that we are using our soon to be released Lightroom Classic Benchmark. Their lead over Intel was not small either, the Ryzen 9 3900X was a very impressive 22% faster than the Intel Core i9 9900K in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Maybe once we are able to test the features that use the GPU a bit better, but for now, there is almost no chance our testing would show any difference. And it's not always straightforward and faster and 100% utilized with more cores etc, as export is.Also it helps import previews and develop module when you make and apply a some preset with Sharpening and Noise Reduction set to 0. Iknow, i know, it's a little bit malicious :-). Between a Quadro RTX 4000 and RTX 2080 Ti, however, you likely won't notice much of a difference. Historically many Adobe products have seemed to favor Intel processors. Puget Systems offers a range of powerful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. 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. Until recently, even 3200MHz didn't meet our stability standards, and going above that is definitely going to cause more system instability. The difference shouldn't be more than 40% though. I think above a small GPU upgrade, you are going to be bottlenecked by your CPU. When I bought the 3900X I immediately noticed the huge difference when exporting images. Overall, the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X is currently the fastest CPU we have tested for Lightroom Classic, but the extra 5% performance over the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X for a 50% increase in cost is likely to be hard to justify for most users. In fact, this is the speed we are planning on using in our Ryzen workstations once JDEC DDR4-2933 16GB sticks are available. Big THX again for your invested time, very kind of you. If you were to compare AMD and Intel processors based on price alone, AMD is anywhere from 11% to 30% faster than Intel. 2) Should I expect my PC to continue to lock up with either of these CPU’s? This link shows Strong Ryzen's Performance : V-ray RT That Lightroom's Link is all about performance between CC / 2015 Version , Some Test show weak result from New Version , like this one even Ryzen 1800 is on par with Intel 7900X ==> Link So Don't expect too much from Ryzen when ST / Clock / AVX 512 is on High Priority . Eine kleine Benchmark Orgie meines neuen Ryzen 2700er Computers. Yet, if i take a look on the scores of the 9900k it's 921 (87.7 active + 96.5 passive). Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Thanks for the reply. are often not what people are the most concerned about. In addition, both Intel and AMD have new processors coming out in the near future which may change the price to performance picture. 4-core CPUs are becoming hard to find (but not yet impossible), and I would certainly like to upgrade my computer to take advantage of the i9 or Ryzen power in all my … You already know it better!• Looking at the NEF numbers, there is really no reason to spend even a penny more for a 3950x instead of a 3900x (for Photoshop and Lightroom only). Is there a planned solution in the near future for this problem? They do have a 10-20% higher price tag as well, although in terms of absolute cost that works out to only a $50 increase which is fairly small if you look at it as a part of the overall cost of a computer. One of the first things is to get our Lightroom Classic benchmark up for public download. Lightroom Classic is not an easy application to directly benchmark, but we hope to have a publicly available version for download in the coming months. The average of 87.7 and 96.5 is 92.1, which x10 is 921. Interesting, that is a much larger difference than we have seen. 2) The system shouldn't lock up, but if it does, you can always do some trickery with Windows affinity so that Lightroom isn't allowed to use a handful of CPU cores. So in general, it should be better overall to leave SMT on currently. Ideally, I would love to have both, as well as if the CPU and GPU are overclocked or not. Is the correct interpretation then that Lightroom has become ~13% slower between versions 8.4 and 10.0 in the 'active' test? Are you going to do a Lightroom Classic 9.0 GPU performance test?It seems that Adobe has improved the GPU usage in Lightroom and I would like to know if I should update my graphics card or not.Great article, keep up with the great work. Having said that, for Lightroom ONLY (and not other Adobe software, which I cannot comment on), you want the fastest 4-core CPU you can afford. There could be merit to using only the CPU for encoding, but while that was once de facto, the performance improvements a GPU can bring can make a huge difference. Noch interessanter wird Platz 2! it is very hard to know where you stand with performance on your current system. Here’s my thought and I’ll try not to ramble. Takt und IPC zählen. 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. On my system, for the Develop sliders (the only performance characteristic I care about as I spend 90+% of my Lightroom time dragging sliders), V9.1 was a slowdown and 9.2 a huge slowdown. PC spec, X470 Aorus latest bios. Thanks for the read! And that '100' benchmark was established with a 9900k system. AMD has had a strong lead in Lightroom Classic for passive tasks like exporting, but Intel managed to maintain a small advantage for active tasks like scrolling through images and switching between modules. We do have a couple of projects planned for 2020 that we hope will help things quite a bit for this however. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. From what your headaches are, the Threadripper 3960X is probably the way to go. Posted by 1 year ago. We've tried to work with the devs to add the functionality we need, but it can be hard to find time to add features that help us when they are busy tackling bugs and adding features that are useful for their end users. In this article, we will be examining the performance of the new AMD Ryzen 5600X, 5800X, 5900X, and 5950X in Lightroom Classic compared to a range of CPUs including the Intel 10th Gen, Intel X-10000 Series, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, and the previous generation AMD Ryzen 3000-series processors. 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 only oddity in our testing was that the Ryzen 9 5950X ended up performing worse than the 5900X - in large part due to some performance issues with the "Build 500x Smart Previews" tests. Archived. And since the August update it finally - 10627947 Even if some processes are slower, exporting and building previews can be twice as fast. As always you guys do great work, thank you for the excellent write-ups and tests! We saw some odd performance issues with the Ryzen 9 5950X, but the Ryzen 7 5800X and Ryzen 9 5900X beat the Intel Core i9 10900K by a solid 14% and 21% respectively, while the Ryzen 5 5600X outperforms the similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K by a bit smaller 11%. For a number of reasons which I won't go into here, there is a preference for Quadro cards. And as knowledgeable as we are about workflows, we are likely never to be as good as the people who are deep in these apps every day using them to make a living. Puget Systems' testing of Lightroom seems to indicate that multiple cores (up to around 8) do seem to help with performance. Not only it's probably more important and has bigger impact on the workflow than the export, but one usually exports less images than import and the work is already done. Maybe it is a bigger deal on older GPUs like your RX 570? 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. You can apply those after you're done, as a batch. Ryzen 3000 series Lightroom performance? Puget Systems Lightroom Classic Benchmark. Definitely enough to skew results, which is why our own internal testing with locked down configurations is always going to be more reliable than publicly uploaded results. Overall, the new Ryzen 5000-series CPUs from AMD are terrific for Lightroom Classic. If you want to see how it stacks up against a wider range of Intel and AMD processors, check back in the coming weeks for articles that will include the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, Intel Core 9th Gen, and Intel Core X-10000 series processors in a number of applications. The Ryzen 7 3700X is the next step up from the Ryzen 5 3600X in terms of performance and price. We confirmed these results multiple times, and for whatever reason, Lightroom Classic simply doesn't like the 5950X at the moment. Lightroom catalog is essentially a database that contains all imported … The API is about as barebones as it could possibly be which makes it really difficult to get a benchmark created that isn't going to constantly break. Calibrating the monitors had no impact as expected, Datacolor Spyder 5 Pro. It may only be about 5% faster overall than the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, but that still makes it solidly the fastest CPU we have ever tested for Lightroom Classic. Since this testing was completed, Premiere Pro 14.2 released with some huge GPU performance improvements. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each test, we also wanted to provide the individual results. These results are then combined into an overall score to give you a general idea of how that specific configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. That is definitely something I want to look at! Hier findet man auch einen AMD, nämlich den Ryzen 7 3700K mit 8 Kernen. Ah, got you, sorry I misunderstood! It is definitely one of the more "finicky" of our benchmarks (none of these apps are made for benchmarking, so we have to do some "creative" things to get them to work). Might not be much if you are lucky, or it might result in numerous random bluescreens or application crashes. In the past, there were arguments for using an Intel processor for Lightroom Classic if you wanted to optimize for active tasks like scrolling through images, but with the new Ryzen 5000 Series CPUs, AMD takes a solid lead no matter the task. So for A7R3 42Mp .ARW files , is the 9900k better than 3900x ? With the higher-end Ryzen models, we are looking at roughly a 14% increase in performance over the Core i9 10900K with the Ryzen 7 5800X, or a 21% increase with the Ryzen 9 5900X. If your workflow includes other software packages, you need to consider how the processor will perform in all those applications. In my opinion that is a shame for Intel, AMD and Adobe altogether and not a reason to hype anybody. So, it is possible the work they are doing there is negatively affecting the tasks we can test, but LrC is still way better overall for the end users. As has been stated in the benchmarks that the video card, above a minimum level, doesn't much impact Lightroom performance (except for the Texture slider); if I upgrade from the K1200 to the RTX 4000 vs the GTX 2080 Ti, am I going to see equivalent performance with the RTX 4000? As for the future, only the developers could tell you.4) No way to really know. You are of course free to do whatever you want with your own system, but we've always taken the stance that reliability is more important than getting a bit more performance since in a production environment, system crashes and lost work costs far more money than losing a few percent performance. First things first: Thank you for the lightning fast testing of the new 3950X!However, it is very difficult to draw meaningful conclusions without a closer look at your numbers:• You seem to have tested Intel with HT-on. So my questions are: 1) given everything I’ve told you, which should I go with? :-), - There are no information about Screenresolution- There are no information about RAM CL-Timings. so great that you did the test with the new 9.0 version! When configured (Preferences > Performance), Lightroom Classic can use a compatible graphics processor (also called a graphics card, video card, or GPU) to speed up tasks of displaying and adjusting images in the Develop module, the Library module's Grid view, Loupe view, and Filmstrip.Enhance Details is also accelerated by the GPU.