i7 or i9 for lightroom

Is this test relaible? In essence, a score of "90" would mean that it gave 90% the performance of the reference system while a score of "110" would mean it was 10% faster. We used a value of 125W for the PL1 setting on all three Intel 10th Gen CPUs we tested along with the following PL2 limits according to Intel's specifications: Setting these power limits made our Noctua NH-U12S more than enough to keep these CPUs properly cooled and helps match our philosophy here at Puget Systems of prioritizing stability and reliability over raw performance in our workstations. 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. **The i9 9900K is 6% faster than the i7 8700K when using Lightroom, but is 15-20% faster in Photoshop in comparison to AMD CPU’s, the 9900K is 20-30% … So similarly to previous experience here, it looks like the more cores the processor has, beyond a certain number, the more SMT or HT hurts performance. This isn't anything new, but now that Intel is being more aggressive about adding cores and pushing the frequency, this is resulting in much higher power draw (and heat) than you would expect from a 125W processor - often resulting in 100c temperatures after only a few seconds of load. However, if we dig into the results a bit deeper, we find that most of this performance advantage comes from passive tasks like exporting and generating previews. What I would recommend is using a piece of software like System Explorer http://systemexplorer.net/ . That said, I would expect your system to export the same images/settings we used in somewhere around 70-80 seconds. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. The Intel 10th Gen Core i9 10900K and i7 10700K are a bit better for active tasks, but for most, it will be worth giving up a barely noticeable performance gain in these tasks for close to a 2x improvement in export performance. Somewhat slower is the 8 core, 16 thread (that's with SMT ON but manually turning cores off in the "Set Affinity" option in Task Manager). Why is such difference (2x) for the same processors? New ACR version (12.3), new Bridge, etc. Intel Core i3 vs i5 vs i7 vs i9 For Lightroom and Photoshop. Feel free to skip to the next section for our analysis of these results.
For extra performance for editing or even a spot of gaming, an NVIDIA GTX 1650 dedicated graphics card (GPU) with 4GB of VRAM is on offer. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic and that performance will vary widely in different applications. Once you overclock and take these differences out of play, the performance difference will decrease or disappear all together. To start off our analysis of the Intel 10th Gen desktop processors we are going to look at the performance in Lightroom Classic versus AMD's 3rd Gen Ryzen processors. It’s i3 vs i5 vs i7 vs i9! Macbook Pro, Vega 20 (i7 vs i9?) I rely on Lightroom in managing, organising and displaying my photos, I shoot raw and I edit in both Lightroom and Photoshop. Keep in mind that base clocks and turbo clocks are arbitrary. Before undervolting the … So basically, after experimenting with various core and/or thread counts, my fastest results are 16 cores, no SMT. Dropping in another 2 to fill all 4 slots made a huge difference, and reduced the times roughly back to the old, pre-upgrade 4-stick setup (actually a few seconds faster due to the faster RAM speed I guess). HOWEVER, to complicate things more, there was also an Adobe update right after I installed the new RAM. (My absolute best time running my test batch yesterday came using Camera Raw rolled back to 12.2.1, 16 cores, no SMT. What mac should I get mainly for using Lightroom,Photoshop and PremierePro ? I don't recommend overclocking, but if that is your goal you will have much better results with the 9000 series because of the better thermal interface material it has compared to the 8000 series (including the 8086). I really wonder if the Z370 motherboard you used negatively affected the 9th gen results? I know we usually test on 64 GB systems here at Puget. It's odd, but that's what it looks like. For active tasks, however, the new Intel Core i9 10900K and Core i7 10700K both beat comparable or significantly more expensive AMD and Intel options. Also during export 5 cores loaded fully, 6th apr. I'm an event photographer and I'm primarily interested in the fastest export time within sensible price range of course. Nos tests précédents ont conclu que les graphiques étaient pratiquement inutilisés. Core i7 9700K vs Core i7 8700K. I'm on a 2016 Macbook Pro w/ 16G RAM and LR can be so slow as to be unusable at times, esp. And also, I feel that latest Lightroom Classic is slower, then previous (9.2). In the module tasks (scrolling through images and switching between the Library and Develop modules), there was surprisingly little difference between all the Intel CPUs we tested, although the AMD CPUs lagged behind just a bit. Puget Systems offers a range of powerful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. 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 And when you overclock the Core i9, it outputs 21,204, which is a 16.8 percent increase over the Core i7. The Core i9 9900K is approximately 20% more expensive than the Core i7 8700K, but we only saw about a 6% performance increase in Lightroom Classic. For reasons, I prefer to buy a Mac over a Windows PC (advertising ID, rest of family on Apple, iMessage, etc) I have seen issue with Ryzen 1800X, where CPU utilization during export was just about 30%. I did try two earlier versions of ACR (12.1 and 11.4), one earlier version of Photoshop (which was utilizing the aforementioned earlier versions of ACR for the roll-back test), still the same slow speed. However, I do understand that Puget are system integrators, and their primary interest is system stability, so it's not likely that they will test under these conditions. It's looks for me, that results is incorrect. Je compte partir sur : - processeur Intel i9 (ou équivalent AMD) - ssd pour les disques durs - 32 Go de RAM (ou 64) of base clock, and additional 100 MHz of turbo clock. During export 12 cores loaded fully on the 99.99% . I've run into a mysterious problem. Export is not much better than my old intel 3960x. The thermal differences are an additional confounding factor, as you may be able to clock an 8700k or 8086k higher than a 9700k or 9900k. This is likely to be what the majority of readers are going to be interested in, so we decided to pull these results out from the full slew of results that are in the next section. To get an idea of whether or not purchasing a more expensive Intel CPU would give you a notable increase in performance, we also include the i7 7820X and the i9 7900X. But I am worried, that it's not that future safe, since it doesn't offer hyperthreading. Thank you! We just already had a bunch of results already on Z370 before that board came in so we stuck with it rather than having to re-run a bunch of testing. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Passant à des tests réels, nous n'avons constaté aucune différence dans Lightroom d'Adobe. At first I wanted to take the i7 8700, but then considered the i7 9700k, because it's so much faster at building smart previews. However, Lightroom Classic currently heavily favors AMD processors for passive tasks like exporting which allows the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and Ryzen 7 3800X to be around 25-30% faster than the Core i9 10900K and i7 10700K respectively. Also export, for example 50x jpeg (22 MP .CR2): Ryzen 7 3700X (slower processor) finished in 34.94 second, Ryzen 3800X (faster processor) finished with worse result (35.22 seconds)How it's possible? So with 2 sticks of RAM (32GB) I was around 6:45, now with 4 sticks I'm back to 4:42, just where I was with my old 4x8GB RAM. 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. It looks like that issue was before Lightrooom Classic was launched - they really improved performance in that new version of Lightroom. I turned SMT off and my test export/save time set a new shortest time record. We make copies of the photos so that we have 100 images to export. I mean import/export images, especially export. If you look across all reviews, you will find that most 8700k's will hit 5.0ghz on a standard air cooler (like the NH-U12S that Puget uses on their benches), while most 9700k's and 9900k's will run into a thermal limit at 4.8ghz on the same cooler. Any thoughts on whether the 2.3 ghz 9th generation i9 8 core processors will be worth the extra money over the 2.6 ghz 9th gen i7 6 core processors? With it, you can set the affinity (how many cores it can use), but it also has the option to make it permanent. The Intel i7-8700K six-core processor looks like the best value, but there have been numerous reports of poor performance with six or more core based systems. So apparently, it does matter, at least on my computer, whether I use Lightroom, ACR, etc. This may not be all that exciting, but this is fairly typical for CPU launches from Intel over the last few years. Exporting the same batch from Lightroom yields the same results. The “Pentium” series is a tier below also aimed at desktop users, the “Celeron” series is mainly aimed at mobile devices, and the “Xeon” series is tailored exclusively for servers and professional users. For most users, this makes the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a much better overall choice for a Lightroom Classic workstation. Lightroom Classic CC is much better at using a higher number of CPU cores than its predecessor, but for many tasks the speed of each core is often more important than the total number of cores. I even temporarily reinstalled 2 sticks of the old RAM (not 4 sticks because I had managed to damage one stick during a heatsink removal). The 9th gen chips have a higher stock turbo compared to the 8700k, but other reviews have found that the 9th gen 8-core chips also run significantly hotter, which reduces maximum overclocking potential. Because it's very, very important - In the time, when Lightroom 5.7.1 utilize I7-2600K on 70-80% during export, Lightroom 7-8 utilize it on 99%. The Core i9 9900K is approximately 20% more expensive than the Core i7 8700K, but in exchange we saw a 15-20% performance increase in Photoshop. With the launch of the new 9th Gen Intel Core Processors, Intel has made a number of improvements including a small frequency bump and an increase in core count. In real world use, the 8700k can be clocked 100-200mhz faster for the same temperatures, so a fair comparison might be a 8700k @ 5.0ghz and a 9700k/9900k @ 4.8ghz. When running an export (or "Save Images" in ACR) with all 16 cores working (default scenario), the 3950x just doesn't seem to work hard enough. No change in my test between SMT on or off.) If Intel hadn't decided to launch the even faster Core i9 9900K, this would have been the fastest CPU we have ever tested for Photoshop. 4-core CPUs are becoming hard to find (but not yet impossible), and I would certainly like to upgrade my computer to take advantage of the i9 or Ryzen power in all my applications, not just LR. It was about 2 min 30 sec faster than with SMT on. While the Intel Core i9 9990XE achieved a higher overall benchmark score in Lightroom Classic than any other CPU we tested, that doesn't mean it is an automatic pick even assuming you can get your hands on it. 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. Now equipped with a quad-core CPU, the 2-in-1 can run Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom without breaking a sweat. I think stock speeds are solid these days, especially because of Turbo Boost. Correct me if I’m wrong, but the Takeaway seems to be that there is not a huge advantage to the 9700 over the 8700 especially when you include the factors of heat and price. It isn't by a small amount either - AMD can at times be up to 2x faster than a similarly priced Intel CPU! Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen. Are the 9th Gen Intel Core Processors good for Lightroom Classic? It is technically the fastest CPU we have tested for navigating around the modules and photo merge tasks, but if you are looking for the best export performance you may be better served with a Threadripper 1920X or a Core i9 7900X or higher CPU instead. Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X ($749) But now the 64 images test batch takes anywhere from 6 to 7 minutes to save/export from ACR using the same settings! I'm not too concerned about the overclocking. https://uploads.disquscdn.c... Hi! https://feedback.photoshop....I understand, it's rather atypical issue, but may be really architecture of this Ryzen processors such, that they show this results, as in your benchmark, and in the same time remains 10-20-30% unused CPU power.if this assumption (partially) true, it can change dramatically CPU preferences. The new, slower results came after the update (I did downgrade to earlier versions of the Adobe apps to try, but still the same slow speed). Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. I watched some other 9900K reviews and it seems like a Z390 makes very little difference or none. That way, anytime you launch Lightroom it can automatically have the affinity set to leave 1 or 2 cores unused for multitasking. Thanks Matt. It was 4:06. While our Lightroom testing is still evolving, we are currently able to accurately benchmark the following tasks with both sets of images: We are currently working on putting up an alpha version of our benchmark for public download (similar to our Photoshop Benchmark) which will have a much more in-depth description of each of these tests. Je suis en réflexion pour me monter une tour PC pour mes retouches photos (Photoshop) et tris/archives (Lightroom). Adobe Lightroom Classic is an interesting application when it comes to CPU performance since it has some very interesting performance quirks - chief among them the fact that AMD processors are overwhelming faster than Intel for a number of tasks like exporting and generating smart previews. On the architecture level, a 8700k core is exactly the same as a 9700k core (edit: with the exception of hyperthreading), so there is no objective reason why the 9700k should be 400mhz faster out of the box. If you got the same time with 24 files, then there is probably a difference in export settings. So I went from 4:45 to about 7 minutes right after the RAM switch. With higher-end hardware, it is actually rare to see such a close relationship between an increase in price and the performance gained, which makes the Core i9 … When I ran your Photoshop benchmark a few months ago, I achieved a score of 1062, which is not far behind your score for a stock 9700k. You should notice the biggest difference in tasks like exporting and generating previews, but when navigating around the Library and Develop modules there is very little difference. These characteristics, together with an IPC (instructions per cycle) number, determine how well a processor performs. Because on my I7 I can't do anything like Photoshop during export, because it's too slowly; when I have to do something heavy during export, I have manually reduce core utilization for Lightroom for 1 or 2 core. One additional thing to note though, the new 9000 Series CPUs may be somewhat hard to find for a while. It is almost at 8700k level. The bulk tasks like exporting and generating smart previews are where we expected these CPUs to shine and while they were ~10% faster than the i7 8700K, we honestly thought we would see a larger difference. Based on 513,988 user benchmarks for the Intel Core i7-8700 and the Core i9-9900K, we rank them both on effective speed and value for money against the best 1,276 CPUs. Hello. However, with the launch of Intel's new 10th Gen desktop processors, it is possible that Intel has fixed whatever is causing this performance issue (assuming that it is even related to the processor at all and not something in the software). if using masks, etc. To make a fair comparison, you have to control for these variables and test either at the same clock speeds, or same voltage, or temperatures. Not being knowledgable about the difference between an i7 and an i9 processor other that the number of cores they support, would not a 2.6 GHz 6-Core i7 actually be a better choice for LR than a 2.4 GHz 8-Core i9? And I know that some of the folks in videos like the one you posted above have that in mind. So far as I could tell his testing in that video was limited to the 9900K, and without hyper-threading the 9700K should actually run quite a bit cooler. Looking at how the Intel 10th Gen processors compare against a wider range of CPUs, there are a couple of key points we want to note: First, compared to the previous 9th Gen processors, we are looking at about a 3-7% performance gain with the new 10th Gen models. 5.0ghz @ 1.31v is very good, as most copies will require 1.35v to be stable at 5.0. Even my Dell G5 laptop beats that time (i7-9750H, 6 cores 12 threads, 32Gb 2666 MHz memory). Maybe the 8700 is still the best bet? Money/quality wise, of course the most expensive one would be the best. Clockspeeds are similar; around 4.2 GHz for the active cores (no matter if 16-core mode or 8-core mode). The new i7 9700K and i9 9900K are certainly good for Lightroom Classic CC, but they are only about 5% faster than the i7 8700K on average. Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. XMP profiles don't always properly set from what I've experienced. However, I noticed that certain demanding active tasks are faster in the brand new ACR 12.3, such as adjusting an image after auto mask was already applied. On average, the Core i7 9700K is about 4% faster that the Core i7 8700K in Lightroom Classic. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each type of task, we also wanted to provide the individual results in case there is a specific task someone may be interested in. Also there is a difference in that the lower spec machine has the Radeon Pro 5300M graphics while the other has the 5500M. Lightroom is generally single-threaded There are diminishing returns on more cores, especially for the Develop Module, so if the i9 has a significantly higher single-core clock speed (and isn't thermally limited as in previous macbooks), it could be worth it to you. I just tested the time needed to export 24 raw files to jpeg from some of my recent jobs and got results between 55 sec to 65 sec - so very similar to what you scored for the 9700K - 9900K. Is it possibble to know average CPU utilization during the test? With your CPU having 6 cores and 12 threads, running all of those is apparently better than just running the 6 cores without HT/SMT. much better at using a higher number of CPU cores, Samsung 960 Pro 1TB M.2 PCI-E x4 NVMe SSD, performs in other applications like Photoshop, 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: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, Lightroom Classic CC 2018: Core i7 9700K & i9 9900K Performance. And it does not matter if I use PBO or not, it's the same time. The scores shown in the chart above are relative to the best possible performance for each task with a Core i7 8700K CPU and a NVIDIA GTX 1080 Ti 8GB GPU. The "Number of cores / threads" graph shows the number of cores (darker area). Some nice new features, but a couple of important-to-me functions or ways of operation were dropped.). If you are looking for a new workstation at roughly this price point, there is no reason not to use the i9 9700K over the i7 8700K, especially considering how well it performs in other applications like Photoshop. But in your test import 500x images (22 MP .CR2) we have: Ryzen 7 3700X - 15.33 seconds, Ryzen 3800X - 8.13 seconds. Any less, like 6 cores (12 threads) or 4 cores (8 threads) yields slower results. I'd recommend going for an 8th gen i3 or i5 paired with a dedicated graphics card and 16gb of ram. In fact, for most users there is little reason to use the more expensive i9 9900K as the i7 9700K is only a tiny bit slower. Same slow stuff :(. Photoshop Lightroom (standalone) is very slow. Mac, Lightroom, i5 or i9? For these types of tasks, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is on average about 35% faster than the new Intel Core i9 10900K while the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is 23% faster than the Intel Core i7 10700K. I'm on a 2016 Macbook Pro w/ 16G RAM and LR can be so slow as to be unusable at times, esp. As far as we are aware, there has not been an official explanation as to why this is from Adobe, Intel, or AMD, but the fact of the matter is that if exporting is a bottleneck in your workflow, going with AMD can make exporting significantly faster. The all-core and single-core turbo speeds on these 9000 series processors match or exceed the 8000 series, while having two more physical cores. Given the three I'm looking at and considering heat, thread, and clockspeed, would you still recommend the i9700? 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: 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, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core 10th Gen vs AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen. Are these 24 files we can see on the LR screenshot? If you are interested in how the 9th Gen Intel Core Processors perform in other applications, be sure to check out our recent Processor articles as we have a number of other articles for looking at the i7 9700K and i9 9900K. if using masks, etc. Because of this, we decided to manually set the PL1 and PL2 power limits in the BIOS. Wow, 3:30. I still have the i7. ), Very interesting.I have made some tests om my PCSystem:Ryzen 3600 CPUAsus TUF B450-Pro Gaming motherboardZalman CNPS 14X cooler,Samsung 850 pro 250 GB SSDRAM: 1x HyperX DDR4-3333 16384MB PC4-26660 PredatorLatest Lightroom Classic 9.3, Export 180 pictures with adjustments - - with HT/SMT off takes 5 minutes 29 seconds. Next time I will be upgrading is in 5-7 years. AND it was in ACR via Photoshop and not in Lightroom. You really don't need much for photo editing, running lightroom and/or photoshop requires a decent amount of ram. Intel Core i7 9700K ($374). But this was only one quick test, and only some geometry adjustments. Might be a problem with the latest Lightroom Classic version. Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. By reading on this sub about undervolting I thought I'd give it a try and oh my, what a difference it makes! I'm wondering if the 8086 is the sweet spot as it may overclock better without the thermal issues, yet is faster than the 8700. One note of caution, GPUs come either integrated/built in or separate/discrete. From an overall perspective, AMD continues to maintain a solid performance lead in Lightroom Classic.

Ferienhaus Pfälzer Wald, Garten Philosophenweg Heidelberg, Königstuhl Heidelberg Parkplatz, Roman Knizka Instagram, Wann Und Warum Kamen Die Spanier Nach Amerika, Grüner Baum Bad Gastein Geschichte,