With that really quick look at workstation performance out-of-the-way, we can move onto a look at gaming performance – aka: the true reason for this article’s existence today. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic. 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. Iknow, i know, it's a little bit malicious :-). 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. Puget Systems Lightroom Classic Benchmark. From what I remember, the difference between various CPUs for 1:1 previews was pretty close to what we see with generating smart previews. I'm sure the hardware itself has an impact as well. 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. 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. I honestly don't know what specifically has caused that drop, but there have been a number of Intel security vulnerabilities that have been fixed at the expense of performance, and Lightroom Classic is adding more GPU acceleration which sometimes can reduce performance at first until they get it really dialed in. 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. 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. It's more expensive, but you get more cores, threads, and headroom in games and software. In theory, this could translate to almost a 20% performance increase over the previous generation, although it will likely heavily depend on the application. 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. The recently launched AMD Ryzen 2nd generation processors are a significant step forward versus the first generation Ryzen and are now well worth considering. At least today we have the option to get twice the performance for twice the money. 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. Yet, if i take a look on the scores of the 9900k it's 921 (87.7 active + 96.5 passive). 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). Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.8 AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X Performance Hier haste einen Vergleich. Can you confirm this?• Compared to your roundup on October 16, 2019, the NEF export of the 3900X is suddenly considerably slower - by 35%! If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. So, the i9 with its faster speed and bvecause Lightroom is "intel optimized" (Dont kid yourself, Ligfhroom isnt optimized for anything) or the 50% more cores in a 3900x For me in my example, switching between Modules in Lightroom and scrolling in developer modul is very important, also 1:1 Rendering . You can apply those after you're done, as a batch. 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. Wanted to ask - will there be benchmarking series, where the new amd GPUs are used in tandem with the new CPUs and SAM on, i am curious weather there is any performance gain to be found outside of games. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. The second thing to note is that we are using our soon to be released Lightroom Classic Benchmark. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. I notice that you perform the Lightroom benchmarks with 3200Mhz CL22 memory. There are also some back-end features we want to make that makes it even more complex, but hugely useful for our articles. So far I'm using OCR to get everything in excel and compare things. 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. 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... . For comparison, both the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12 Core and Intel Core i9 9900K 8 Core have a MSRP of $499. It probably isn't just Lightroom though, Windows updates and drivers also have an impact on performance - and sometimes not in a good way. Thanks for the reply. 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 over a CPU like the 3700x, which is around the same price but has 2 more cores/4 more threads. So if import with previews is a big concern, I would look at the scores for the Import and Smart Preview tests. 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? So in general, it should be better overall to leave SMT on currently. Think it's time to jump ship! 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. Lightroom is hard to benchmark since the things that are easiest to test (importing, exporting, generating previews, etc.) 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. 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. We confirmed these results multiple times, and for whatever reason, Lightroom Classic simply doesn't like the 5950X at the moment. The reason I ask is because there are many reports of Lightroom not performing well if the CPU has more than 4 physical cores. 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. 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. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each test, we also wanted to provide the individual results. That is definitely something I want to look at! 3. 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 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. These results are then combined into an overall score to give you a general idea of how that specific configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. No matter how you look at it, however, the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X performs very well in Lightroom Classic. As always you guys do great work, thank you for the excellent write-ups and tests! I see that the 'active score' benchmarks are all under 100. i understood how you calculate the total score (Active + Passive)/2*10 .. It be good to compare these results with SMT off. That is the same reason we use a NVMe storage drive as well. 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. 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. 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. 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?". What took the Ryzen 3 3100 1,026 seconds to encode dropped to 200 seconds once a GPU was added in. 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. Interesting, that is a much larger difference than we have seen. However, we do need to make clear that since the Intel X-series CPUs are not as strong in Lightroom Classic as the lower-priced Intel 10th Gen CPUs, that is being somewhat unfair to Intel. 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. Close. The devs have also been putting a ton of work into improving many aspects of LrC that we haven't figured out a good way to test like brush/slider lag and things like that. Hey! Best Workstation PC for Adobe Lightroom Classic (Winter 2020), Adobe Lightroom Classic: AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, 3080 & 3090 Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 & 3090 Performance, Best Workstation PC for V-Ray (Winter 2020), SOLIDWORKS 2020 SP5 AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Best Workstation PC for Metashape (Winter 2020), Agisoft Metashape 1.6.5 SMT Performance Analysis on AMD Ryzen 5000 Series, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core 10th Gen vs AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Threadripper 3990X 64 Core, What is the Best CPU for Photography (2019), Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, Lightroom Classic CPU Roundup: AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, AMD Threadripper 2, Intel 9th Gen, Intel X-series. If you take results seriously, you must search for your workflow results in details. And since the August update it finally - 10627947 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. I have BIG catalogs- 30K to 100K images. 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.) 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. So stay tuned on that! In other reviews, however, there are indications that the 3950x could do significantly better than the 3900x with SMT-off. Since this testing was completed, Premiere Pro 14.2 released with some huge GPU performance improvements. 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. Can you please explain this? 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. How about a comparison between the fastest affordable Quadro (the RTX4000) and the GTX 2080 TI? With the launch of AMD's new Ryzen 5000-series processors, however, it is very likely that AMD will be able to take a very solid lead over Intel in Lightroom Classic no matter what task you are looking at. 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. That reference score is completely static and won't ever change until we add tests to our benchmark that forces us to re-create it. Now I can just take a small break and get back to work. Noch interessanter wird Platz 2! Interestingly the Texture slider on the K1200 is real time, no measurable delay. 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%. Thank you for such a competent and detailed reply. 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. I'm having a blast editing 4K content in Premiere, but Lightroom? Both missing informations are very important for the endresult. Is this right? Posted on 2020-03-16 07:14:10. As for the future, only the developers could tell you.4) No way to really know. 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. For a number of reasons which I won't go into here, there is a preference for Quadro cards. Frequency can be grabbed through WMI or through the command line, but timings would need an external application which we have tried to avoid doing since it makes cross-platform support much harder. So it would be really exciting to compare the new CPUs to a Core i7-4700K or Core i7-7700K. I haven't seen any benchmarks on the Ryzen CPUs, don't go by the hype, find some benchmarks. Lightroom: cache size 500GB catalogue size 5-6gb library 6tb Settings and library is identical. 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. 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. Until recently, even 3200MHz didn't meet our stability standards, and going above that is definitely going to cause more system instability. Yep, it looks like performance has gotten worse for the active tasks we are testing since we first made the reference scores. This effectively puts AMD in the lead over Intel no matter what your budget is and what parts of Lightroom Classic you want to optimize for. The differents can be mor den 40% !!! The CPUs in the HP Z440 are almost 6 years old now, so that is what is going to be holding you back. 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. I NEVER delete anything. Back again doing some real world testing of Lightroom CC 2017 running on Windows 10 and Ryzen 1700x. 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? 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. High praise & recommendation for the current generation Ryzen CPUs. 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. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Future software or BIOS updates could of course fix this issue, although we saw the same behavior between the Ryzen 9 3900X and 3950X, so this is unlikely to be a simple BIOS or software bug. 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.. 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. 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). Benchmark. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. 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 . Right now I’m running an Intel i7-6850 and lightroom pretty much locks up my system (100% CPU Usage) when I’m importing and creating previews or exporting. 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. For the Crowd - The overall result of active and passive tasks are indicators. Now, AMD is launching one more 3rd generation Ryzen CPU - the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X. Is this due to another "performance optimization" of Adobe? I would believe that scaling goes way down after 6 cores though. Is the correct interpretation then that Lightroom has become ~13% slower between versions 8.4 and 10.0 in the 'active' test? Should you choose the new Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core CPU or the Intel i9 9900K 8-core? It shouldn't affect performance much, but good benchmarking is about removing variables to try to get the most accurate results as possible. When using nvidia FPS counter my rysen system peaks to 3-4fps while my intel system goes up to 20-30fps while regulating the sliders. When I bought the 3900X I immediately noticed the huge difference when exporting images. 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. AMD Ryzen 9 5950X Gaming Performance. Organize Lightroom Catalogs. So we would need to be able to detect what display the app is running on which I don't believe we can do very easily. 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. For years, neither Intel nor AMD have done anything to really justify an upgrade. Ah, got you, sorry I misunderstood! It seems like Affinity Photo is in some Tasks much faster. Right now our plate is pretty full, but that is pretty close to the top of my to-do list. 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. Is anyone out there using Lightroom with i9 or Ryzen CPUs? I’ve narrowed it down to 2 top contenders, the TR 3960X and the Zen 5900X. We are working on getting the benchmark up for download. 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? Maybe you should setup a databases system where people could upload their results to compare with others. The Ryzen 7 3700X is the next step up from the Ryzen 5 3600X in terms of performance and price. At a glance then it would appear that all of the systems reviewed here are notably slower than that old 9900k test rig - which is clearly incorrect. In my opinion that is a shame for Intel, AMD and Adobe altogether and not a reason to hype anybody. Takt und IPC zählen. Most important, however, is the performance leap in editing. Ideally, I would love to have both, as well as if the CPU and GPU are overclocked or not. One of the first things is to get our Lightroom Classic benchmark up for public download. (assuming that the 10700k in these results is on par with that old 9900k). Soon after launch, there should be an update that adds support for AGESA 1.1.0 which is supposed to increase the performance of each Ryzen CPU by another few percent. A Quadro RTX4000 is going to perform about on par with a RTX 2060 Super or RTX 2070. Comparison of 2700x and 3900X stock rendering 550 still photos. 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. 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. The "Passive Score" does a pretty good job of summarizing performance for tasks like that as well. There is no need for that high-end of a GPU, but in the off chance that it does make an impact, we want to make sure that the performance is being primarily limited by the CPU rather than another component. 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. 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. 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. In the worst constellation and best constellation, I bet there exist more than 40% difference (LR Classic and PS). The Quadro line is mostly about having high amounts of VRAM which almost never a problem for photography applications. Historically many Adobe products have seemed to favor Intel processors. System Specs ----- Asus Pro X370 Prime (Bios 0515) Ryzen 1700x @ … PC spec, X470 Aorus latest bios. 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. Is there a planned solution in the near future for this problem? Why? great job again with yours online database, but! In Photoshop is “opening a file” or “filter results” for me very important, and on and on... Lightroom is sooo good and simultaneously sooo bad :-) I love and edit my files sometimes in Capture One too, but I found Lightroom for my organisational tasks a little bit better. The 8-core Xeon will fit but considering how much slower it is, not sure that would be an upgrade. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. To get up to the same performance as a RTX 2080 Ti, you are going to need a Quadro RTX 6000, and even then it will likely be slightly slower. 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. 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. I also know Puget Systems recommendations for RAM frequency but in the real world there are many out there with 3600 Mhz or more, see Puget systems database results :-) My working settings are moderate CL 16-18-18-38 2933 Mhz. 3950x: 19 min 30 sek Here both CPUs had 100% usage for the entire exporte, but despite having twice the core counts the 3950x was slower. 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. The difference shouldn't be more than 40% though. 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. Even if some processes are slower, exporting and building previews can be twice as fast. 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%. Compared to the previous generation AMD Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, these new processors are all roughly 10% faster than the CPUs they are replacing. After all that, we can try to track RAM timing, screen resolution, overclocking, and a number of other aspects of the system information. We do have a couple of projects planned for 2020 that we hope will help things quite a bit for this however. Either way you look at it, however, the 3950X further solidifies AMD's lead over Intel for Lightroom Classic. I actually had been considering the 9900 prior to the 3900x, but the link in my OP is to some benchmarks specifically related to Lightroom performance, and the 3900x has about a 25-30% gains over the Intel counterparts. so great that you did the test with the new 9.0 version! There is only a 5-10% improvement above the E5-1650 V4 by the latest 6-core Xeon processors. I am stoked for the release of the Ryzen 5000 chips. Yep, you are right on the average thing, the only thing you missed was that we multiple the average by 10 because a bigger number means it is more important. If you were to compare AMD and Intel processors based on price alone, AMD is anywhere from 11% to 30% faster than Intel. From what your headaches are, the Threadripper 3960X is probably the way to go. If your workflow includes other software packages, you need to consider how the processor will perform in all those applications. 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. 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. 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): Putting a dual slot video card right next to the HP Z Turbo Drive would likely create heat issues as Hard Disk Sentinel says it's the hottest running drive in my machine. Here’s my thought and I’ll try not to ramble. 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, personally, I wouldn't worry too much about future socket compatibility, especially with DDR5, PCI-E Gen 5, and who knows what else that might be coming in the next several years. At a recent event, Intel ran a comparison using Adobe Lightroom that showed better performance on a Tiger Lake i7-118G7 machine versus one equipped with a Ryzen 4800U.