In order to see how each of these configurations performs in Lightroom Classic, we will be using our PugetBench for Lightroom Classic V0.92 benchmark and Lightroom Classic version 10.0. great job again with yours online database, but! Overall, the new Ryzen 5000-series CPUs from AMD are terrific for Lightroom Classic. So in general, it should be better overall to leave SMT on currently. 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). (assuming that the 10700k in these results is on par with that old 9900k). Even if we do out own testing on older platforms, nothing is ever going to be as accurate as comparing the performance of the exact system you are using today to whatever the latest hardware is. The officially supported RAM speed varies from DDR4-2666 to DDR4-3200 depending on how many sticks you are using and whether they are dual or single rank, and DDR4-2933 is right in the middle as well as being the fastest supported speed if you want to use four sticks of RAM. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. This benchmark version includes the ability to upload the results to our online database, so if you want to know how your own system compares, you can download and run the benchmark yourself. Ryzen 3000 series Lightroom performance? It does seem that Lightroom Classic in particular is memory speed sensitive and could benefit from faster RAM. Please add the Quadro RTX 4000 to your GPU test. And that '100' benchmark was established with a 9900k system. This processor features a staggering 16 CPU cores which is really starting to blur the line between "consumer" and "HEDT" (High End Desktop) processors. Back again doing some real world testing of Lightroom CC 2017 running on Windows 10 and Ryzen 1700x. Same with the new Ryzen - as far as I know, AMD hasn't made an official announcement, so no way to know for sure. Hey Matt, there are some things that are not clear to me. The reason we use a 2080Ti in our CPU-based testing is simply to make sure that the GPU is not a bottleneck. Compared to the previous generation AMD Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, these new processors are all roughly 10% faster than the CPUs they are replacing. We do have a couple of projects planned for 2020 that we hope will help things quite a bit for this however. Close. Should you choose the new Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core CPU or the Intel i9 9900K 8-core? Lightroom catalog is essentially a database that contains all imported … Puget Systems' testing of Lightroom seems to indicate that multiple cores (up to around 8) do seem to help with performance. Both missing informations are very important for the endresult. Either way you look at it, however, the 3950X further solidifies AMD's lead over Intel for Lightroom Classic. 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 November 11th, 2019. Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. You can still get more overall performance from the (significantly) more expensive Threadripper processors, but the Ryzen 9 5900X, in particular, is not too far behind those beefier models. Even this relatively small 10% increase in performance allows the modest Ryzen 5 5600X to beat every single Intel processor we tested, although it only snuck by the Intel Core i9 10900K by a few percent. AMD has said before that Threadripper wouldn't change socket, then they changes to TRX40 with the latest CPUs. However, since Intel is launching their new Core X-10000 series processors and AMD is launching their new 3rd Gen Threadripper processors in the near future, we are only going to compare the 3950X to a handful of Intel and AMD CPUs. I really wouldn't advise going above 3200MHz though. The difference shouldn't be more than 40% though. What took the Ryzen 3 3100 1,026 seconds to encode dropped to 200 seconds once a GPU was added in. 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. Benchmark. Ryzen system is approximately 2x> less responsive. 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. Why? Either way you look at it, however, the 3950X further solidifies AMD's lead over Intel for Lightroom Classic. I have BIG catalogs- 30K to 100K images. 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. A faster export is certainly welcome. In our testing for RAM timings for example, we only saw around a 5% max difference between RAM speeds: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . Over the last few years, AMD has been making great strides with their Ryzen and Threadripper processors, often matching - or beating - the performance from similarly priced Intel options. However, the increase in core count comes with a fairly large MSRP price of $749. That shouldn't happen though, since Lightroom likely won't ever use all your cores.3) I don't think there is an arbitrary limit like that. Puget Systems Lightroom and Photoshop Benchmarks Before we tell photographers if AMD or Intel runs Lightroom and Photoshop better, it is important to know why it is Matt Bach from Puget Systems is so qualified to speak to the topic. So stay tuned on that! Interesting, that is a much larger difference than we have seen. Could you make the benchmark downloadble to execute yourself? Interestingly the Texture slider on the K1200 is real time, no measurable delay. 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.. 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. 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. 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. How is the performance? 9.2 is at least 4 times slower than the last V8 release. 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. It's actually slower on the new setup, and I see many people complaining about Lightroom's bad performance on CPUs with more than four cores. That seems huge considering we only see 5-15% gains between CPU generations. Why?• Video Card: Is it really meaningful to use a graphics card that would normally not be installed in a Lightroom computer (RTX 2080 Ti)? For me in my example, switching between Modules in Lightroom and scrolling in developer modul is very important, also 1:1 Rendering . If you want more information on the specs of this new processor, we recommend checking out our New CPU Announcement: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X post. The Ryzen 7 3700X is the next step up from the Ryzen 5 3600X in terms of performance and price. 3) Adobe CLAIMS it only uses 6 cores, if that’s the case, do we expect them to start utilizing more cores in the future? I dont understand why the 9900K is not 1000. It probably isn't just Lightroom though, Windows updates and drivers also have an impact on performance - and sometimes not in a good way. It’s the Mac Pro that’s *REALLY* bad. 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. Feel free to skip to the next sections for our analysis of these results to get a wider view of how each configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. I don't think that is because any of them are scared, but rather because it is much harder to place a value on workflow optimizations than it is for things like "how long does this effect take to apply?". The differents can be mor den 40% !!! I see that the 'active score' benchmarks are all under 100. AMD hasn't added any more cores to their new line of processors, but among other things, they are touting a 19% IPC (instructions per clock) improvement. So if import with previews is a big concern, I would look at the scores for the Import and Smart Preview tests. So for A7R3 42Mp .ARW files , is the 9900k better than 3900x ? 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. It is looking like a pretty massive programming project to not only allow people to upload, but sort, search, compare, etc., but that is something we are really excited about doing. As for the future, only the developers could tell you.4) No way to really know. Since that reference score was made, we've upgraded to Lightroom Classic 9.0 and there have been numerous BIOS, driver, and Windows updates that have come though. Posted on 2020-03-16 07:14:10. I'm sure the hardware itself has an impact as well. Der Intel Core i9-11900K kann den AMD Ryzen 9 5950X bei einem Gaming-Benchmark übertreffen 14.12.2020 Cydia, der "App Store für Jailbreaker", verklagt Apple wegen des App Store-Monopols 11.12.2020 Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. 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. For a number of reasons which I won't go into here, there is a preference for Quadro cards. For the Crowd - The overall result of active and passive tasks are indicators. 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. 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. Screen resolution is easier, but it also more complicated than it sounds. 16gb ram and gtx1080. Hello AMD! 9.1's biggest reduction was undo (Ctrl-Z), now with 9.2, applying the slider is as slow as undo. Multi displays can make it really hard to tell what the actual screen resolution is if there are different display resolutions in use, as does different DPI settings. The i7 7700K is $50 cheaper than the AMD 1700X, and yet it outclasses the 1700X in both lightroom and photoshop (and web browing performance, etc): There are also some back-end features we want to make that makes it even more complex, but hugely useful for our articles. The K1200 is a pretty old GPU, so you should notice some difference with the newer versions of Lightroom Classic where they have been improving GPU acceleration support. I recently upgraded from an Intel i5 2500K system to a AMD Ryzen 1800X-based machine. We don't re-use results from previous testing (or do so very rarely and clearly mark them), and since performance changes over time, that means that the 9900K will pretty much never hit exactly the same scores that it did on that specific day. I haven't tried exporting with SMT off, but I have turned off SMT when editing and it runs so much smoother. Could you do this, please?• In comparison today vs 6 years ago (in IT-Calender: When the dinosaurs still walked the earth): you have to pay twice as much for the CPU and twice as much for the motherboard, to get a 2-3 times faster export, but only about 35% more power in active tasks. High praise & recommendation for the current generation Ryzen CPUs. In this article, we want to see whether the increase in core count (and price) is worth it for Adobe Lightroom Classic. Even this relatively small 10% increase in performance allows the modest Ryzen 5 5600X to beat every single Intel processor we tested, although it only snuck by the Intel Core i9 10900K by a few percent. Organize Lightroom Catalogs. 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%. The Quadro line is mostly about having high amounts of VRAM which almost never a problem for photography applications. Is there a solution for the same Benchmark as Photoshop to validate both for example - new PS Action compared with new AP Macro? Ryzen 3000 series Lightroom performance? These results are then combined into an overall score to give you a general idea of how that specific configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. 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... . No, SMT (and HT on Intel) is on. I NEVER delete anything. How about a comparison between the fastest affordable Quadro (the RTX4000) and the GTX 2080 TI? So it would be really exciting to compare the new CPUs to a Core i7-4700K or Core i7-7700K. We confirmed these results multiple times, and for whatever reason, Lightroom Classic simply doesn't like the 5950X at the moment. 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). Maybe it is a bigger deal on older GPUs like your RX 570? Compared to the Intel Core i9 9960X 16 Core or Core i9 9900K, you are looking at close to a 25-30% increase in performance! Posted by 1 year ago. The average of 87.7 and 96.5 is 92.1, which x10 is 921. Lightroom is hard to benchmark since the things that are easiest to test (importing, exporting, generating previews, etc.) I’ve narrowed it down to 2 top contenders, the TR 3960X and the Zen 5900X. At the first look it seems like there can't be more than 5% but :-): RAMDual rank -> Single rank2 DIMM -> 4 DIMMDaisy Chain -> T-Topology2666 Mhz -> 3600Mhz -> 4400 MhzCL 19-19-19-19 -> CL-14-15-15AMD -> INTEL, Resolution1980 + 1020 -> 2560 x 1440 -> 3840 x 2160. Turning off SMT can improve performance a bit in tasks like exporting, but in the last few versions of LrC, it also lowers performance in active tasks. 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. Can you confirm this?• Compared to your roundup on October 16, 2019, the NEF export of the 3900X is suddenly considerably slower - by 35%! Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. 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. There are quite a few things we want to test in LrC, but unfortunately the API is way behind other apps like Photoshop and Premiere Pro. Until recently, even 3200MHz didn't meet our stability standards, and going above that is definitely going to cause more system instability. It is also worth noting that the 5800X and 5900X outperformed the 10900K not only in the passive tasks but the active ones as well, which was where Intel was previously maintaining a slight edge. And hold that thought on the upload thing - that is a project we are hoping to get to next year. 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. 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. HP Z440, 6-core Xeon, 64GB ECC RAM, Quadro K1200 4GB, five SSDs (dedicated Samsung 2TB 860 EVO on the PCIe bus for the library/catalog and 1 TB Samsung 840 EVO for the Preview Cache), two 4K monitors but Lightroom full screen on just one monitor. Right now our plate is pretty full, but that is pretty close to the top of my to-do list. Maybe in the future we will try to figure out reliable ways to check for all those things, but for now we are more concerned about making the benchmarks reliable and that they are testing everything we want. Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.8 AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X Performance Hier haste einen Vergleich. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Its a strong alternative to lightroom and it has better performance, but I can´t seem to find how it responds to different hardwareGreat article BTW :D. Capture One is on our list, but it honestly will likely be at least a year or longer before we are able to take it on - we have a few other major project to take on first. 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. But 9960x is suddenly much worse with smart previews in comparison to your October-Benchmark. I'm having a blast editing 4K content in Premiere, but Lightroom? I have played around with it a bit as well, and it looks like it is going to be really difficult to accurately and reliably benchmark. Thanks for the read! 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. One of the first things is to get our Lightroom Classic benchmark up for public download. With this motherboard, Thunderbolt support is no longer as much of a factor when choosing between Intel 10th Gen and AMD Ryzen CPUs in our workstations. In the worst constellation and best constellation, I bet there exist more than 40% difference (LR Classic and PS). A Quadro RTX4000 is going to perform about on par with a RTX 2060 Super or RTX 2070. However, your testing (Messy Memory Speed Standards) showed an overall increase of 9% in Lightoom compared with the slower 2666Mhz memory. Er schafft den Test in 119 Sekunden und kostet gerade mal 370 Euro.. Der Intel Core i7-8700K kostet ähnlich wenig, braucht aber für den Parcours 195 Sekunden.. Ist sieht also so aus, als ob ein aktueller AMD Ryzen Prozessor eine sehr gute und preisgünstige Wahl für Lightroom ist.