There was a new patch for Ryzen from Adobe in Premiere Pro that boosted the performance. 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. Puget Systems offers a range of powerful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. All of the CPUs besides ryzen and 7700k are using 32gb of ram. 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. 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. Buy with confidence! This new AMD CPUs are really nice :) Last year i have buyed (for next few years) an i7 9700K and its blazingly fast even with huge 42Mpx A7R3 files!I keep watching your reviews and if someone asks for photo/video computer, i know, where to go for relevant informations... :). With these kinds of real-world tests, anything around 5% or less you should really consider the same. Absolutely! Is it right, that 9900k simply destroys everything, if I work with 8k timelapses (42mp)? Close. Wait - save - upgrade higher. Honestly, I would just leave it alone and not worry about it - you probably wouldn't notice a difference unless you got out a stopwatch and started timing things. What was the resolution of the monitor? Especially with the launch of Skylake-X (which is also covered in the article I linked) Ryzen simply isn't a good choice for Lightroom. I believe I am more concerned with "Active Tasks" or seeing results as I edit. Especially with brushes, if you move the brush too slow you won't see any difference between hardware. 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. - we will be basing the majority of our conclusions with HT/SMT disabled in the instances that it improves performance. Se você exporta um número alto de imagens todos os dias e tem o orçamento, os AMD Threadripper … Hi! It would not be terribly scientific, but if it would help inform your decision I'm up for giving it a shot :). At the same time, the AMD Threadripper CPUs are just overall not a great fit for Lightroom, especially the higher-end "WX" models, so we would recommend avoiding them if possible. I dont have a ton of cash left for this and as I've been reading PS/LR don't rely much on the GPU. Gen4 PCIe I doubt will have any influence on Lightroom performance. 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. Whenever a new generation of CPUs is launched, the main question everyone wants answered is how fast they are. It’s no surprise then that Puget Systems is considering moving a significant number of their rigs to the AMD Ryzen 5000 series. If it's more OpenCL-heavy, I've found this generally is better supported & faster with AMD. Again assuming you can overclock all the CPUs roughly the same amount, based on the 10 second per image you are seeing with the 3570K you should see about 6.6 seconds with a 7700K and 4.25 seconds with the 6850K. 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?) 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. 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. Starting with "everything else", Ryzen compares decently against the eight and ten core CPUs coming in at just 5-10% slower. Since the 5600x isn't out yet, there's no testing to indicate if it's supposed faster single core speed will help improve performance in Lightroom … It is supposed to help for things in the develop module, but from what I've heard it is a bit lackluster at the moment. Hi Matt, after many bios and drivers updates, Ryzen performance has increased overall. Tests results for DaVinci Resolve indicate, according to Puget Systems, that “the AMD Ryzen … It is very difficult to do subjective testing like that, at least in an automated / repeatable fashion. Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. We see similar margins when running the Puget Systems Lightroom Classic benchmark. Seems like the 6800k is the better choice if exporting a lot (I use Canon DPP to export RAW to 8 bit TIFF which currently takes 10 seconds per image on my i5-3570k system, and I do frequent single image exports). So I saw a video on YT (https://www.youtube.com/wat... showing the how different memory speeds effect Ryzen performance. But the 9900K isn't always the best - it trades with the Ryzen 3900X depending on what you are doing. That really good news! 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). I mainly intend to use the system for photo editing. I wonder how much those results translate. Adobe & AMD work closely so we'll likely see improved performance in coming weeks. I feel like the image scrolling might relate the most. I recommend waiting for 3950x. However, if we assume that you would be able to overclock about the same amount for each CPU you could just take our results at face value since you are really talking about relative performance rather than raw number of seconds. The only exception to this is our new brush lag test where AMD holds a firm lead. 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. I'd be super happy to get any kind of additional information about it! I hear you that doing more testing in the development module would be great. And exactly as you've mentioned opening a few tabs here and there (eg. 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. RAM speed is something we get asked about semi-regularly, but to be honest we don't have any testing planned to cover it at the moment. Not saying you can't do it of course, but just be aware of the potential issues before jumping into it. Some we saw decent gains, others almost nothing at all: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . Programs like Photoshop and Lightroom deliver the best performance when they’re paired with generalist processors, like the Ryzen … Performance per dollar, I feel WX 7100 offers a much better value - especially after the latest AMD Radeon Pro Adrenalin Edition driver which radically improved performance across the board! 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. He could have run 128GB, but would have been limited to doing so at 2666MHz... and whenever we run that speed on these Ryzen processors, we get tons of folks complaining that we are making them under-perform... even though, technically, that is the maximum supported RAM speed on Ryzen 3rd Gen when using four dual-rank memory modules :/. 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, … We did do some testing comparing DDR4-2666 to DDR4-3200 on both Intel and AMD CPUs, but the only place it measurably increased performance was when importing and exporting images. I don't know how Lightroom works under the hood, but when you have situations where each calculation depends on the results of the one before it then you can't really thread very well. Especially the export benchmarks? 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. I think that is really a call that each person has to make for themselves, but I personally would go with the higher capacity. Since that is up in the air, we decided to go ahead with this CPU roundup article since our testing uncovered some very interesting results. Puget Systems is a boutique vendor that caters to professional users with custom-designed systems targeted at specific workloads. Graduates of Utah State University - the names, photos, skill, job, location. It is one of the more "finicky" benchmarks we have since we have to use a lot of external scripts to do things that can't be done through the plug-in API. 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. I have a Ryzen system and the same Prime X370 Pro board and when 4 Dimms are used memory speed is capped so why not try 2 Dimms? What graphics card do you guys suggest? Puget Systems Lightroom Workstation – 4.1 (4.6) GHz twelve core AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, Nvidia GeForce 2060 Super (8 GB), 64 GB RAM, 2 TB NVMe SSD. Unfortunately, in the trials I've done this is really inconsistent so it isn't really a reliable way to compare hardware. On a 12core system you have room for having other apps rendering in the background. If someone had errors, they might not jump to suspecting their RAM speed. We have some really cool projects we are going to be starting on (I hope) early next year that will dramatically improve this. However, if you are concerned primarily about export times, the i7 6850K is about 40% faster at exporting images in addition to being 11-16% faster for everything else - all for only a small increase in price. However, if you really dig into the results, there are really two primary tasks where Ryzen blows away Intel that is causing the higher overall scores: exporting and building smart previews. Although AMD has some interesting stuff coming out soon with their 7nm 16-core Ryzen 9 3950X chip, Lightroom is still historically most ... then the Intel Core i7 8700K is still our go-to recommendation for Lightroom. I recommend the Adrenalin Edition (Non-Enterprise version). For each platform, we used the maximum amount of RAM that is both officially supported and available at the frequency we tested. That is just a fact of life with this kind of testing.3) I hear you, and thanks for the feedback! I would think that for processing batches of images at a time they could do better, since each photo could be handled in its own thread, but for working on a single image some operations may simply not thread well. Hmm, that's a shame. 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). The Asus ROG Zephyrus G14 includes an eight-core Ryzen 9 4800HS, GeForce RTX 2060 Max-Q graphics, 16GB of DDR4/3200 memory, a 1TB PCIe 3.0 SSD, a 14-inch FHD screen, and a weight … Unless the editing is really a pain for you. Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen. Are the Ryzen 3rd generation CPUs good for Lightroom Classic? Doesn't matter how fast the drive is if the CPU/RAM is the bottleneck. This is perfect timing as I'm planning a 3rd gen Ryzen build for Lightroom specifically. Option 2: Launch Lightroom Classic and go to "File -> Plug-in … PUGET technical folks really know their stuff :). Thunderbolt is finicky enough that we only ever use Gigabyte motherboards for it since they seem to be the best in terms of firmware/driver support. The most trusted website I have found when it comes benchmarks for hardware in Adobe programs is Puget Systems. From my understanding it doesn't can anyone comment on this? 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. Lots of reports that turning off GPU acceleration actually improves performance. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Shame really. Thanks for this Matt! Or maybe it is the difference between the more typical L3 cache on AMD and "Smart Cache" on Intel or even the maturity of Hyperthreading on Intel. For exporting, I would look at the "Export 100 images" which was RAW to JPG. This should give way more bang for the bucks. Okay, so I loaded up Cinebench R20 on repeat, putting a ray-tracing render workload on each thread the CPU provides, and then: - Opened up Edge (didn't have Chrome on these testbeds)- Opened several tabs with various websites, including YouTube- Watched a video, surfed around a bit, etc- Copied files in Windows Explorer- Played a quick game of Microsoft Solitaire, Both systems felt perfectly usable. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic. The brush lag and auto WB & Tone are our first attempts at measuring things like slider responsiveness. 4 slots populated with 16GB modules each gives a maximum of 64GB. I would love to run this benchmark to test mine system (just to see & laugh).--EDIT: well, I forgot that Intel is changing their chipset almost every gen. Well, having Z170 or similar you need to switch mobo too. Instead of 64GBs @ 2400MHz maybe try 16 or 32GBs @ 3200 (or best speed possible). 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. It use all cores when importing and exporting. 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 guess Gamecache ( 32mb L3 on Ryzen 3800x ) plays important role.different between 2700x and 3800x is massive. 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. 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. Since the installation of the Fall Creators Update, Microsoft has been pushing AMDx64-specific updates which seem to be improving stability & performance as well. We hope to have things ready pretty shortly after launch, but it all depends on exactly when the launch is. Can you estimate when we can download the benmark to test our machines? They don't have to. The PCI-E add-on cards (even from Gigabyte) just don't seem to be as stable or reliable as the integrated version for whatever reason. Normally we would go through the results on a test by test basis, but this time the results were remarkably consistent across the various tests. A few quick questions if you have a minute: - You mention in the article that something like a 9900K could feel snappier than a 3900x, but the scrolling, module switch, and auto-develop benchmarks are within like 2-3% at most. Puget Systems. In fact, if anything the 128GB of RAM will cause a slight performance decrease since it is ECC RAM which causes a very tiny decrease in performance. 100cores is probably as fast as 8 cores. No one else is making (or should I say sharing?) 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. But if you move it too fast, LR lags out and the brush starts skipping around. 19. Habe bisher mit einer dedizierten Grafikkarte (GTX 1050, als 2GB … However, Lightroom Classic currently heavily favors AMD processors for passive tasks like exporting which allows the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen … Re: Puget Systems tests Lightroom 7.2 In reply to Archer66 • Feb 11, 2018 2 We've tried to figure out a good method to benchmark exactly that, but couldn't figure out a good way. Active tasks are similar to top Ryzen (3800x-3900x) and for passive task //you're gonna have time for another coffee. This would also increase the cost difference between Ryzen and an Intel processor with more than four cores in these particular systems. That's the main benefit. Happy Compute! 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 Also, if we are at this topic - are you going to test the GPU acceleration some-time in the future? Why not get 30-40% more speed for free (other than power and heat)? Thanks for the article and fast test of the new Ryzen CPU's.After these test's i changed my mind from buying a R7 1700 (OC3,7) to a 7700K (OC4,5+). 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 … Some filters will be faster with the more affordable WX 7100 & some may work better with the P4000. So, if your workflow involves culling through thousands of images, but only exporting a handful of them, there is an argument to be made for using an Intel 9th gen processor. Yes, higher scores are better. 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. Recommended Systems For: Adobe After Effects; ... Ryzen Workstations based on AMD Ryzen B550 and X570; ... is using three Puget Systems … Not only will we include results for a few of the previous generation Ryzen CPUs, but also the latest AMD Threadripper, Intel 9th Gen, and Intel X-series CPUs. Our benchmark was not as good as we wanted it to be and we wanted some time to further develop it. After Effects will be virtually the same. Puget Systems Lightroom Classic Benchmark. Remember his Mb was Gigabyte X570.Maximum Memory is 3200 Mhzhttps://www.pugetsystems.co... No, it is oveclocked xmp memory. Unless you're I/O or memory bandwidth limited, it seems to me that ought to be a embarrassingly parallel . I am certain the performance jump will be less than what we've seen from 3800x to 3900x, but it will still hammer intel's newest Cascade Lake offerings. 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. - Do you think 3rd gen threadripper will still be bad for LR? I want to get one (prob 3950x) but would love to see your analyses before pulling the trigger. I do hope that there is an overall followup in about 4-6 months after MS, Adobe, and mobo makers issue some updates. Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. Intel Core i7 6900K 3.2GHz Puget systems also publishes extensive Adobe PS benchmarks too. Overall, I don't think I could feel any difference between the 9900K and 3950X in this subjective comparison.Hopefully that info helps! That is if there are reports of significant changes to reported performance...But at the very lease there is a baseline established now. 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. Different story here. Awesome, thanks so much for everything! AMD and Microsoft report there are no scheduler issues with Ryzen. That is really, really hard to test consistently and accurately, especially when comparing CPUs where the difference is likely going to be minimal. If you're bored, it'd be interesting to see if that translates to Lightroom. 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. Disabling HT is one fix, but you can also just adjust the processor affinity so that Lr doesn't use the virtual cores and it gets back most of that performance without affecting other applications. The app is scalable. 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. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. Hey, you are running XMP overclocked memory on AMD, and stock jedec crap on Intel. Thanks so much for your great work!I'm on a i7-7700k system at the moment and am thinking of upgrading to an i7 9th gen 9700k. 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. Which one feels more responsive under heavy load. I edit 2-4k pics monthly too, culling through at least 20k - on a mobile i5-4278U (2.6ghz). Look for some near term BIOS updates from planar makers. ECC RAM is what we use in our X99 workstations that is what we wanted to test with. 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. 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. Feel free to skip to the next section for our analysis of these results if you rather get a wider view of how each CPU performs in Lightroom Classic. Their … 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. They are great overclockers. Since the Ryzen CPUs we tested are only about $100-200 cheaper than the i7 6850K, that is a pretty large difference in performance. 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. We just wanted to note that since there are some people who really don't export a ton of images, but do a lot of edit work directly in Lightroom. But I am still thinking the faster IPC of the 7700k will make the computer feel snappier - resulting in time savings for everything other than the exporting phase. It has 25% more cores and boost clocks are a bit higher at 4.7Ghz. In addition, we will have a separate table in the "Benchmark Results" section that has the results with HT/SMT enabled on every CPU that supports it. This is a short tutorial/comparison video on how to run run Puget After Effects Benchmark. 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. There are a few boards from ASrock (I believe) that have Thunderbolt, but that is their own implementation that is not certified by either AMD or Intel. If Ryzen is out of the question it now comes down to overclocked 7700k vs overclocked 6800k? Unfortunately, Lightroom Classic was not something we were able to test at that time due to two primary factors: The good news is that we finally have our benchmark updated to the point that we are comfortable resuming testing. And even if adobe manages to significantly improve multicore performance, it's probably going to take some time from now, and if it takes something like 4 years to do so, most users who bought a 7700k today will be already considering buying a new cpu. Thanks for the reply. Exporting images is the one area where Ryzen beats the Core i7 7700K, clocking in at about 10-11% faster. In regards to LightRoom performance does the GPU have any real impact on performance? Perhaps 3800x>3900x by benchmark is a good indicator of 3900x>3950x improvement? 9 months later I am still scratching my head at this poor performance on a ryzen 1700x with an rx580. I understand the stabity rationale for the 2666MHz RAM. That in itself might be something we could benchmark (maybe), but LR gives almost no feedback for when things like that happen. 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 - … Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. If you use 4 sticks, it is either 2933 or 2677 depending on whether the RAM is single or dual rank. Would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts on this,Kind regards. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. Thanks - great article.Export is definitely the task which I feel like I'm waiting around for most (i.e. Considering that Ryzen is also either slower or comparable to these two Intel CPU options in other programs like Photoshop, Intel CPUs are a pretty clear winner for photo editing and image processing workstations. 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. In fact, that means that the Ryzen 5 3600 is faster than even the Core i9 9900K for these two tasks! We discovered an issue with Intel Hyperthreading and AMD SMT that causes low performance for some tasks. Do you think that is right? Given that we are building hundreds of systems a month, we have to stick with what we can be sure is the most reliable configuration possible - and in the case of RAM, that means sticking with what CPU manufacturers officially certify their chips to work with. The images and settings we used in our testing were: 18MP (5184x3456) If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. https://www.youtube.com/wat... What resolution were the previews made? Right now, DDR4-2400 appears to be rock solid and even DDR4-2666 shouldn't be a problem, but going beyond that we feel is a bit of a risk. If you only use Lightroom occasionally, they will certainly do the job, but definitely not optimal.