Some we saw decent gains, others almost nothing at all: . But it may be sooner or later (I know, so precise) depending on what happens at MAX. While Win7 boots just fine on Ryzen, MSFT announced you will not get Windows Updates if you do so. There is actually no certified Thunderbolt support on X570 - we have confirmed this directly with AMD. 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 gap widens a bit with the Core i7 6850K where Ryzen was 11-16% slower. Too bad the Intel K chips weren't OCed in these tests. AMD and Microsoft report there are no scheduler issues with Ryzen. And in some cases - primarily exporting and building smart previews - the Ryzen CPUs get … He uses stock setting Without using any OC settings. You absolutely can get performance gains with higher speed RAM, but it is going to depend heavily on the application. Can you estimate when we can download the benmark to test our machines? In the case of AMD's Ryzen, there are also a lot of questions surrounding how they compare to the processors available from Intel. You may want to skip over the 3800X since the 3700X performs almost exactly the same, but all the other models are great choices. Hey, you are running XMP overclocked memory on AMD, and stock jedec crap on Intel. That is something we're trying to convince the Lightroom Classic dev team to add so we can test it in the future though. If you regularly follow our content, you may have noticed that several months ago we published a range of CPU comparison articles looking at Photoshop, Premiere Pro, After Effects, and many other applications. I edit 2-4k pics monthly too, culling through at least 20k - on a mobile i5-4278U (2.6ghz). 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. 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! 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 … No geral, isto torna a 3ª Geração AMD Ryzen a atual recomendação da Puget Systems para o Lightroom Classic. - Do you think 3rd gen Ryzen using gen 4 NVME would change any of these results meaningfully? All this means is that if you don't have a problem with longer export times and don't often use smart previews, Intel is likely to still feel a bit "snappier" in Lightroom Classic. Do you recommend WX 7100 or Quadro P4000 for Lightroom/Photoshop/Premiere suite? 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). In Adobe Lightroom Classic, the Intel Core 10th Gen processors such as the i9 10900K and i7 10700K do very well in active tasks like scrolling through images and switch modules - coming in at about 5% faster than a similarly priced AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen CPU. 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. Remember his Mb was Gigabyte X570.Maximum Memory is 3200 Mhz No, it is oveclocked xmp memory. 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. File copying didn't seem affected, but maybe that was unfair since both systems have extremely fast NVMe drives so that wasn't really something that would take long anyway :). Por lo menos según esta prueba de Puget Systems, una empresa especializada en el montaje de PCs de alta gama, que ha realizado tests comparando los nuevos MacBook Air y Pro con chip Apple M1 con dos estaciones de trabajo PC con procesadores AMD de última generación.. Puget eligió dos PC de escritorio equipados con AMD Ryzen 7 5800X y Ryzen … It really depends on if your work is going to be more CUDA dominant or OpenCL. I am perplexed that 6850k and 6900k were 40-50% faster at exporting images than the 1700X given that exporting seems to benefit from more cores. Even if it is a few percent slower in some situations, just a handful of crashes across our customer base due to using out-of-spec memory would cause more time (and maybe data!) If your workflow includes other software packages (We have articles for Photoshop, Premiere Pro, After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, etc. 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. Active tasks are similar to top Ryzen (3800x-3900x) and for passive task //you're gonna have time for another coffee. Spherical Projection, No Crop. I keep zooming in and out and that's where I lose most of my time. The new Ryzen 3000 chips officially support memory speeds up to 3200MHz. Not enough RAM causes performance problem, but having extra doesn't really improve performance at all. Not saying you can't do it of course, but just be aware of the potential issues before jumping into it. With 3866 c16, or even 3600 c16 kit, the Ryzen CPU could really stretch its legs. 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. Puget Systems' testing of Lightroom seems to indicate that multiple cores (up to around 8) do seem to help with performance. 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. If it's more OpenCL-heavy, I've found this generally is better supported & faster with AMD. Very good and detailed as usual. Changes in core count/price are coming.I don't think you're gonna have 15% gain in "active tasks" with 3600x over 6700. Doesn't matter how fast the drive is if the CPU/RAM is the bottleneck. that is exactly what i would to like to know too... i dont care waiting for export a little longer, when i can do meanwhile other tasks smoothly.Planning to upgrade from i7 quad to i9 9900k wit GB z390 designare with 64-128gb, reading this article doubting if maybe amd would be worth it.....the choice would be easier if the HT?SMT issue would be solved. And exactly as you've mentioned opening a few tabs here and there (eg. 9 months later I am still scratching my head at this poor performance on a ryzen 1700x with an rx580. 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. 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, … That is another important consideration for me - Any guesses on how 3950x will fare in these benchmarks? The most relevant takeaway from Puget’s benchmarks is that high-end CPU’s aren’t necessarily the best choice for photo editing. However, if you are concerned about export times the "High End" Core i7 CPUs were anywhere from 40-60% faster than Ryzen so using one of those CPUs would likely be a much better choice. I have several questions:- when testing the Brush Lag - did you have GPU acceleration turned on? On average, the new 3rd generation Ryzen processors were about 20% faster than a similarly priced Intel 9th gen processor. which makes it a pretty big project to tackle.2) Honestly, I think most of that is margin of error. Especially the export benchmarks? We have some really cool projects we are going to be starting on (I hope) early next year that will dramatically improve this. Awesome, thanks so much for everything! If so I'd still be keen to pick up the Intel over the AMD due to that efficiency while exports are running. That is just a fact of life with this kind of testing.3) I hear you, and thanks for the feedback! I never game with my system so it'd be interesting to know if it's worthwhile upgrading from my ancient Radeon HD 7750 while I'm upgrading the rest of my system, just for Lightroom. 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. Lightroom still makes very little use of GPUs and is more dependent on your CPU and the type of harddrive you're running it on. 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. Some filters will be faster with the more affordable WX 7100 & some may work better with the P4000. What was the resolution of the monitor? But still... How many photographers out there OC their rigs? People talk gaming or solidworks/maya which is beyond my needs. We generally recommend a GTX 1060 as a starting point on our systems, but if you are in a budget crunch something a bit lower should be fine. Habe bisher mit einer dedizierten Grafikkarte (GTX 1050, als 2GB … I understand the stabity rationale for the 2666MHz RAM. Gen4 PCIe I doubt will have any influence on Lightroom performance. Anyway, my next machine will be based on AMD then :) thanks again for your effort, this test is a real benchmark of how CPU should be really tested in software... 1) Yes, GPU acceleration is pretty much always enabled in our testing unless otherwise noted. Intel Core i7 6900K 3.2GHz If you're bored, it'd be interesting to see if that translates to Lightroom. Which test would be show exporting performance of Canon DPP (from RAW to 8 bit TIFF)? I wonder how much those results translate. 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. 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). Since this is a completely new platform that is still getting uefi/bios updates specifically addressing memory, would it be best to take out some of the memory? My observation on 9900K vs 1700x (not exactly a direct competitor but they have similar export/rendering power) is as follows: 9900K - Renders a timelapse with LRtimelpse from ~600 RAW files (files from A7III downscaling to 4K). 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 - … 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. Recommended Systems For: Adobe After Effects; ... Ryzen Workstations based on AMD Ryzen B550 and X570; ... is using three Puget Systems … None of our Lightroom testing should need more than ~20GB of RAM so the amount of memory in each system shouldn't cause any performance difference. 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? Do you expect to be able to publish results for the new chips shortly after launch? Depending on whether and … The second one I created from the chart on their website which has a ton of HEDT CPUs included too(I omitted them). We have been doing testing with all three of these speeds since these chips launched, and I can tell you for sure that running the RAM at 3200Mhz is definitely a bit less stable if using four sticks, and it gets worse if you go beyond spec to 3600MHz. I couldn't find this info in the text, sorry if I missed it. 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. 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... :). That is definitely something we want to expand on, but in general I think those two tests should be relatively accurate for slider responsiveness. I hear you that doing more testing in the development module would be great. While the Core i7 7700K was 15-20% faster than the Ryzen CPUs for this task, Ryzen was actually around 5-7% faster than the "High End" Core i7 CPUs. Puget Systems is a boutique vendor that caters to professional users with custom-designed systems targeted at specific workloads. The only exception to this is our new brush lag test where AMD holds a firm lead. No problem at all! Thanks - great article.Export is definitely the task which I feel like I'm waiting around for most (i.e. — Puget Systems ... AIO (all-in-one) liquid cooling systems … 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. 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. The first is exporting images where Ryzen was 10-11% faster than the Intel Core i7 7700K. Great, thank you ! If I had to give a guess, probably late November. 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. With these kinds of real-world tests, anything around 5% or less you should really consider the same. Everyone, AMD Ryzen is BRAND NEW architecture never seen before in a CPU. 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. We discovered an issue with Intel Hyperthreading and AMD SMT that causes low performance for some tasks. I know that a 6 AMD would give me at 60-100% increased performance in "pasive" tasks (1:1 previews, smart previews and exporting) but i wonder how much performance i'd get on active tasks. Tests results for DaVinci Resolve indicate, according to Puget Systems, that “the AMD Ryzen … Getting micro-stutters if I absolutely try to shift to doing anything else up the the point where it's possible to freeze the machine. 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. PugetSystems: Intel i9-7940x, 7960X & 7980XE vs TR 1950x benchmarks LightRoom, Photoshop, After Effect, Maya 3D, Cinema 4D. 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. Hyperthreading & SMT causing low performance in Lightroom Classic, HT/SMT performance issue in Lightroom Classic, 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 CPU Roundup: AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, AMD Threadripper 2, Intel 9th Gen, Intel X-series. AMD was more focused on IPC gain in Ryzen, and under developed in other areas which tend to be underutilized (like AVX). CPU utilisation on 100% on all cores. The benchmarks we will be using are the latest version of our (as yet unreleased) Lightroom Classic benchmark. Look at the Ryzen 7 3800X and Ryzen 3900X scores against the Core i9 9900K,and its no wonder Puget Systems … 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. This is a short tutorial/comparison video on how to run run Puget After Effects Benchmark. Look for some near term BIOS updates from planar makers. It would be super helpful to find out how you guys feel about both systems. Since the results for exporting images was quite a bit different than the other Lightroom tasks we tested, we decided to separate our average CPU performance chart into two categories: exporting images and "everything else". Would you be able to rerun the tests ? This would also increase the cost difference between Ryzen and an Intel processor with more than four cores in these particular systems. Before you build a machine, check out their blog posts and tests … loss than the amount that would be saved by having faster RAM. I'm actually not 100% sure when we will have the Lr benchmark up for download, but probably in the next couple months. On a 12core system you have room for having other apps rendering in the background. these observations, so this kind of knowledge is priceless. Recommended Systems For: Adobe Lightroom Classic; Adobe Photoshop; Post Production. All of their products should be using heavy multi threading already, 20 cores+. And it seems like that the price of the 7700K ist dropping day in day out in the next few weeks. Not perfect, but certainly more accurate than making a wild guess. 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). Because of this, we are simply going to present the raw data and call out the few interesting cases: Out of all the results, there are two two test that are worth calling out specifically. That in itself might be something we could benchmark (maybe), but LR gives almost no feedback for when things like that happen. However, if LR needs 18GB and you are choosing between 32GB of higher frequency RAM vs 64GB of safer RAM then it is really just a call between more performance but higher risk of failure versus a bit lower performance but more reliable and safer long-term (less need for upgrades). That is really, really hard to test consistently and accurately, especially when comparing CPUs where the difference is likely going to be minimal. ... 2019 iMac Pro vs 2019 Custom PC by Puget Systems: Lightroom … Presenting that many results in a clear and concise manner is really difficult. As for the responsiveness difference, I really don't think it will be all that much better with the 9900K, which is why we are exclusively pushing Ryzen on our Lightroom workstations: . 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 also publishes extensive Adobe PS benchmarks too. 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. Thank you for such detailed answer, was wondering why it's only Asrock that used TB3.also good news that all x299 got 50% price cut, in Israel all current (9th gen ) X299 8c~18c got 50% off.suddenly workstation got much cheaper ;-). The architecture is Zen 2. Although the 7700K has half the CPU cores, it is about 25-30% faster than the Ryzen CPUs for these tasks. The subjective "snappier" interface feel is suspect, IMO. Taken on a Canon EOS REBEL T3i, 5x 18MP RAW (5184x3456) We aren't planning on testing with Windows 7 at this point since Windows 7 no longer has mainstream support from Microsoft and the existing supply has nearly dried up to the point that we soon won't be able to sell it on our workstations at all. Wait - save - upgrade higher. I think that is really a call that each person has to make for themselves, but I personally would go with the higher capacity. I might do a 'light' overclock but has there been any change in terms of ACTIVE tasks with the latest version of LR?Just how noticeable are the active tasks between an i7 9700k and say an AMD equivalent?In my case passive tasks aren't an issue. Adobe Lightroom, now with hardware-independent unusability. If you use 4 sticks, it is either 2933 or 2677 depending on whether the RAM is single or dual rank. All of the CPUs besides ryzen and 7700k are using 32gb of ram. 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. We hope to have things ready pretty shortly after launch, but it all depends on exactly when the launch is. I'm a landscape photographer that lives in LR, working through thousands of very large RAW images per outing. 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. This is why Ryzen 3900x blows away the 9900k in that task. 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. You are right that the 7700k should feel overall snappier and is better for photo editing work in general. Import a lot of files, color correction, then export a lot of high resolution files to jpeg. Shame really. And yeah Lightroom need to improve their multi core performance. Graduates of Utah State University - the names, photos, skill, job, location. I currently use a 10-core i7-6950X OC'd to 4.4GHz on all cores and still want more speed for LR and Premiere Pro. Thanks for the review Matt. Some of their apps (Acrobat anyone?) Puget Systems Benchmarks on AMD Ryzen 9 3900XT. 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. Puget Systems. Hi William, thank you for taking the time to respond. I'm aware that 1700x might have been affected by the scheduler issues, but my bios, windows updates, drivers, etc are all up to date (which supposedly was to remove the issue). 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. 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. We made a small utility that does this automatically as a temporary workaround until the root issue is fixed that you can download: Hi Matt, many thanks for the long awaited test, it's amazing! At the same time, if you do care about export times then the Intel Core i7 6850K is ~40% faster at exporting images along with being ~15% at everything else in Lightroom. So I guess the decision you have to make is if the difference between 6.6 seconds with the 7700K and 4.25 seconds with the 6850K when you export a single image is worth giving up overall faster performance (and responsiveness) for everything else in Lightroom. It's so fresh that it hasn't been fully optimized yet. Thanks for the reply. Here the 3300X edged out the Core i7-7700K, making it 8% faster than the 9400F. I've personally noticed a huge difference in between AMD and Intel (Ryzen 1700x and 9900K) in how it handles situations where CPU is at 100% load already. Intel CPU will cost you around the same that this 3600 AMD CPU + motherboard.//Possibly you're gonna gain some performance when they resolve problems with HT (or not, I would not take this much into consideration). Also, if we are at this topic - are you going to test the GPU acceleration some-time in the future? ), the Intel 9th gen processors do still hold a slight lead. Not necessarily for Lightroom, but for Lightroom we also wouldn't recommend an X99 system in the first place - a Z270 system with a 7700K is going to be better overall. It use all cores when importing and exporting. 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. Would it be closely aligned with "RAW to DNG" or "RAW to JPG" ? From my understanding it doesn't can anyone comment on this? We've tried to figure out a good method to benchmark exactly that, but couldn't figure out a good way. The images and settings we used in our testing were: 18MP (5184x3456) $3498. I definitely OC my rigs. 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+). 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. So 3200MHz isn't really bottom of the barrel, it is the fastest that AMD is comfortable calling viable with these chips. Option 2: Launch Lightroom Classic and go to "File -> Plug-in … I do know that 6-8 cores reveal better performance at higher resolutions. 19. This should give way more bang for the bucks. 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. PUGET technical folks really know their stuff :). In this article, we will primarily be looking at how well the new Ryzen 3600, 3700X, 3800X, and 3900X perform in Lightroom Classic. It will be very subtle in most cases, but if I was in your shoes I would personally go with the 7700k. wasted time) and so is my biggest concern. Since the installation of the Fall Creators Update, Microsoft has been pushing AMDx64-specific updates which seem to be improving stability & performance as well. 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. Smart previews are always 2560px on the longest side I believe, and ours ended up with a final resolution of 2560x1707. 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. Yes, higher scores are better. In the other applications we have tested (Photoshop, Premiere Pro, and After Effects) Ryzen does OK, but in Lightroom it is significantly slower than even the lower priced Intel CPUs. New Adobe Lightroom CC 2015.10.1 CPU Performance Comparison: Skylake-X, Kaby Lake-X, Broadwell-E, Skylake, Ryzen 7.