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. 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! 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. Ryzen 3000 series Lightroom performance? We are working on getting the benchmark up for download. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each test, we also wanted to provide the individual results. No, SMT (and HT on Intel) is on. Is there any chance you might add capture one to the software you benchmark in the future? Is anyone out there using Lightroom with i9 or Ryzen CPUs? 16gb ram and gtx1080. 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, 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. In other reviews, however, there are indications that the 3950x could do significantly better than the 3900x with SMT-off. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. 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. The recently launched AMD Ryzen 2nd generation processors are a significant step forward versus the first generation Ryzen and are now well worth considering. 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? 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... . Interestingly the Texture slider on the K1200 is real time, no measurable delay. 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. 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. Between a Quadro RTX 4000 and RTX 2080 Ti, however, you likely won't notice much of a difference. 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. 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. How about a comparison between the fastest affordable Quadro (the RTX4000) and the GTX 2080 TI? Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. 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. One of the reasons we sometimes used the Intel 10th Gen CPUs over Ryzen when the performance was similar was because only Intel platforms had passed our qualification process for Thunderbolt. Screen resolution is easier, but it also more complicated than it sounds. Ideally, I would love to have both, as well as if the CPU and GPU are overclocked or not. 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. 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. 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. 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. 3. How is the performance? 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?". 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. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. The "Passive Score" does a pretty good job of summarizing performance for tasks like that as well. 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. Could you make the benchmark downloadble to execute yourself? Since this testing was completed, Premiere Pro 14.2 released with some huge GPU performance improvements. Is this due to another "performance optimization" of Adobe? Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen. Is the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X good for 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. 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. Now I can just take a small break and get back to work. Generally though, most people don't upgrade their CPU every generation since the performance gains usually aren't enough to warrant it. 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. 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. 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). For the Crowd - The overall result of active and passive tasks are indicators. 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%. Maybe you should setup a databases system where people could upload their results to compare with others. Interesting, that is a much larger difference than we have seen. Thanks for all the reviews you're making, there are really useful. 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. 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. 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. You say that the score of 1000 is made by the average of Passive Score + Active score of a system who is based on the Intel 9900K. Lightroom catalog is essentially a database that contains all imported … Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. If you take results seriously, you must search for your workflow results in details. In my opinion that is a shame for Intel, AMD and Adobe altogether and not a reason to hype anybody. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. Hence the attraction of a single slot card. Even with all the improvements Adobe has done in the last couple of Lightroom versions to take advantage of the GPU, it is still primarily a CPU-driven application. 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. Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.8 AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X Performance Hier haste einen Vergleich. 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. 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. I used to run this task, go out for lunch, return home and listen to music for a few hours before it finished. Comparison of 2700x and 3900X stock rendering 550 still photos. 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. 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. There is only a 5-10% improvement above the E5-1650 V4 by the latest 6-core Xeon processors. So stay tuned on that! And that '100' benchmark was established with a 9900k system. Benchmark Analysis: AMD Ryzen 5000-series vs Intel 10th Gen. Are the AMD Ryzen 5000-series or Intel Core 10th Gen better for Lightroom Classic? The CPUs in the HP Z440 are almost 6 years old now, so that is what is going to be holding you back. 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. 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). 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. Things have actually changed a bit regarding HT/SMT with Lightroom Classic V9.0 . 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. I haven't tried exporting with SMT off, but I have turned off SMT when editing and it runs so much smoother. 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. "Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. 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. If you were to compare AMD and Intel processors based on price alone, AMD is anywhere from 11% to 30% faster than Intel. In theory, this could translate to almost a 20% performance increase over the previous generation, although it will likely heavily depend on the application. Now, AMD is launching one more 3rd generation Ryzen CPU - the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X. We were close about a month ago, then we realized Lightroom 9.0 was going to launch during Adobe MAX so we held off. 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. 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. Hier findet man auch einen AMD, nämlich den Ryzen 7 3700K mit 8 Kernen. 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 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. Ryzen system is approximately 2x> less responsive. One of the first things is to get our Lightroom Classic benchmark up for public download. The export/smart preview performance drop is still present, but performance for everything else saw a pretty sizable increase in performance with Hyperthreading enabled. 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. 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): Puget Systems Lightroom Classic Benchmark. 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. 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 my case, switching between to Monitors (separately connected and separately tested on the same PC) 1980 + 1020 -> 2560 x 1440 (AMD RX570 4GB) gives me a difference of 17% in some important Tasks! 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.) I dont understand why the 9900K is not 1000. Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. 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. I'm sure the hardware itself has an impact as well. I NEVER delete anything. For comparison, both the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X 12 Core and Intel Core i9 9900K 8 Core have a MSRP of $499. I'm currently speccing up a new desktop build to mostly run Lightroom and Photoshop, and have read elsewhere that there are good gains in memory performance by using 3600Mhz ram with CL16 or CL18 timing. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. 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. In our testing for RAM timings for example, we only saw around a 5% max difference between RAM speeds: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . 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. For me in my example, switching between Modules in Lightroom and scrolling in developer modul is very important, also 1:1 Rendering . Historically many Adobe products have seemed to favor Intel processors. We used to test 1:1 preview generation, but it wasn't something supported by the API so we had to drop it when we made the benchmark available for public download. 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. Ah, got you, sorry I misunderstood! 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. 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. 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. So if import with previews is a big concern, I would look at the scores for the Import and Smart Preview tests. 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. Lightroom: cache size 500GB catalogue size 5-6gb library 6tb Settings and library is identical. AMD’s focus has been on offering higher core count processors v their Intel rivals but the performance per core of an AMD processor is still very slightly behind that of Intel. Or does there exist a “political correctness” problem with Adobe? When I bought the 3900X I immediately noticed the huge difference when exporting images. 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. Yep, it looks like performance has gotten worse for the active tasks we are testing since we first made the reference scores. 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%. In addition, both Intel and AMD have new processors coming out in the near future which may change the price to performance picture. So in general, it should be better overall to leave SMT on currently. Thanks for the read! 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. I notice that you perform the Lightroom benchmarks with 3200Mhz CL22 memory. 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? i understood how you calculate the total score (Active + Passive)/2*10 .. I’ve narrowed it down to 2 top contenders, the TR 3960X and the Zen 5900X. 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.