Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers 
Thread started 14 Jan 2012 (Saturday) 14:30
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

What should I upgrade to optimize my Lightroom 4 performance?

 
*sigh*
Hardware Master (or something like that)
Avatar
25,047 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Jan 15, 2012 12:57 |  #16

What model SSD is it?

You can find SSD's for $100 all the time now, you may be able to get a better one for less.

Also, SSD's these days are really investments. They are now like every other component in a computer. The jumps in performance from one generation to the next are huge, so a SSD isn't the type of thing you want to buy now to use in the future. Buy it when you need it.


-Nick | Gear | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,009 posts
Likes: 369
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 15, 2012 14:42 |  #17

LR is very CPU intensive, going to an i5/i7 will be more expensive as you need new RAM and motherboard too, but it'll give you the biggest gain by far. An SSD would be the next biggest gain.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rajah ­ sulayman
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
262 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: New York
     
Jan 15, 2012 19:38 |  #18

tim wrote in post #13708843 (external link)
LR is very CPU intensive, going to an i5/i7 will be more expensive as you need new RAM and motherboard too, but it'll give you the biggest gain by far.

That's the problem. Since my rig is a good 2+ years old, I pretty much have to gut renovate it. No mobo, new cpu, new ram. All said that's maybe a $500-600 price tag.

An SSD would be the next biggest gain.

Whereas this is a $100 price tag.

That said, I've decided to put the kibosh on the whole thing and just save up for a major overhaul. I'll just use this as motivation to rustle up a few gigs to pay for it.


.
focalmatter - photos that aren't entirely crap (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DisrupTer911
Goldmember
Avatar
2,452 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 29
Joined Jul 2008
Location: NJ, USA
     
Jan 15, 2012 20:02 |  #19

rajah sulayman wrote in post #13704646 (external link)
8gb isn't enough? Would moving to 16gb honestly give me better performance than moving my working files to an SSD or getting a new mobo/cpu?


I'm using "scratch disk" as a general term.

If I went with SSDs, I'd use them to house my lightroom catalogs, cache file, and my temporary photo directory (where I dump and work on photos before archiving them)


16GB of ram makes a huge difference in Adobe apps however Lightroom doesn't won't move to the windows pagefile/cache like photoshop does nor does it use a scratchdisk like photoshop does.

I think your biggest benefit would be to utilize max ram and an SSD for OS/apps and put your data on a 10,000 rpm Raptor drive.

that's what I've done and by far, this is the biggest increase in LR performance. No longer does spot removal cause a sluggish response when rapid-fire removing compared to 16GB of ram, a SSD, and a raptor.


www.vividemotionphotograph​y.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
51,009 posts
Likes: 369
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 15, 2012 20:27 |  #20

Raptor drives are a waste of money these days, they used to be the fast seek option, but not any more. If you need fast seek, get an SSD. If you need a lot of bulk data transferred quickly, any high density 2TB drive is fine. Raptor are more a museum piece now.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
DisrupTer911
Goldmember
Avatar
2,452 posts
Gallery: 4 photos
Likes: 29
Joined Jul 2008
Location: NJ, USA
     
Jan 16, 2012 11:55 |  #21

I'm sorry but a 10k drive will out-seek/out-read/out-write any 7.2k drive.

An SSD is not a wise choice for the sole purpose of storing data on it, waste of speed primarily.

10k Raptors hold their place very well against an SSD & make a great data storage option if you want all out speed in a mechanical drive.


www.vividemotionphotograph​y.comexternal link

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
*sigh*
Hardware Master (or something like that)
Avatar
25,047 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Jan 16, 2012 12:52 |  #22

DisrupTer911 wrote in post #13713500 (external link)
I'm sorry but a 10k drive will out-seek/out-read/out-write any 7.2k drive.

An SSD is not a wise choice for the sole purpose of storing data on it, waste of speed primarily.

10k Raptors hold their place very well against an SSD & make a great data storage option if you want all out speed in a mechanical drive.

The Raptors are actually slow compared to todays 7200RPM drives. The velociraptors are a bit faster in certain instances, but not worth the jump in price. Some of the larger 2-3TB 7200 RPM drives actually outperform the small velociraptors as well. The 600GB velociraptor generally still comes out on top, but not by much.

They are nowhere even close to performing on par with the current generation of SSD's though.


-Nick | Gear | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
rajah ­ sulayman
THREAD ­ STARTER
Senior Member
Avatar
262 posts
Joined Nov 2007
Location: New York
     
Jan 17, 2012 12:16 |  #23

DisrupTer911 wrote in post #13710273 (external link)
nor does it use a scratchdisk like photoshop does.

Which is why I clarified that I was using the term "scratch disk" in a more general sense.

I think your biggest benefit would be to utilize max ram and an SSD for OS/apps and put your data on a 10,000 rpm Raptor drive.

I already have my OS on an SSD, and beyond your anecdotal evidence I have yet to see or read anything that indicates going from 8gb of ram to 16gb would improve my Lightroom performance. Photoshop? Sure. But I've got Lightroom on an 8gb system right now and I've never seen it use more than 2gb at a time.

Thanks for the feedback, all, but I'm gonna put the whole upgrade thing on hold for now until I can afford a new CPU/board.


.
focalmatter - photos that aren't entirely crap (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tekkie
Goldmember
Avatar
2,621 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Dec 2006
Location: Clarkston, MI
     
Jan 17, 2012 12:35 |  #24

downgrade to LR3 :) LR4 seems to be far slower than 3 to me so hopefully thats just in the beta


Canon 1DMKII, 7D, 5DMKII, 1D MKII
Canon 500L, 100-400L
, 70-200 2.8L, 17-40L, 24-105L, 24mm 2.8,50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.8, 135mm 2.8 SF, 100mm Macro
Canon 430 & 580 flashes

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jan 19, 2012 05:33 |  #25

tim wrote in post #13710384 (external link)
Raptor drives are a waste of money these days

Especially if they're only going to be used for storing old data that one has finished working on. Who cares how fast old images load into a slideshow, or how quickly you can open an MP3? 0.000001s is indistinguishable from 0.0001s.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Hen3Ry
Goldmember
Avatar
1,061 posts
Likes: 27
Joined Nov 2009
Location: Aptos, CA, USA
     
Jan 19, 2012 13:25 |  #26

*sigh* wrote in post #13708392 (external link)
What model SSD is it?

You can find SSD's for $100 all the time now, you may be able to get a better one for less.

Also, SSD's these days are really investments. They are now like every other component in a computer. The jumps in performance from one generation to the next are huge, so a SSD isn't the type of thing you want to buy now to use in the future. Buy it when you need it.

And don't worry about wearing it out.


***************
Je n'avais pas besoin de cette hypothèse-là.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
thedge
Senior Member
417 posts
Joined Jul 2010
Location: Vancouver, BC
     
Jan 19, 2012 13:58 |  #27

DisrupTer911 wrote in post #13713500 (external link)
I'm sorry but a 10k drive will out-seek/out-read/out-write any 7.2k drive.

An SSD is not a wise choice for the sole purpose of storing data on it, waste of speed primarily.

10k Raptors hold their place very well against an SSD & make a great data storage option if you want all out speed in a mechanical drive.

Raptors are also a waste of money for simple data storage, a "waste of speed". Many new 7200RPM drives can load large files very fast, on par with Raptors. Raptors only start making a difference on pure random access, many small files, etc. Thats where 10,000RPM drives excel and are targeted for, things like DBs, and not even the LR DBs. For storing image files a Raptor will be almost as wasteful as an SSD.


7D - 100-400 L, Sigma 28, Sigma 17-70 2.8-4

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
*sigh*
Hardware Master (or something like that)
Avatar
25,047 posts
Joined Feb 2011
Location: Phoenix, AZ
     
Jan 19, 2012 21:40 |  #28

Hen3Ry wrote in post #13732746 (external link)
And don't worry about wearing it out.

Yeah... too many people are concerned with SSD's wearing out these days. The first gens had some issues.. but really, since the speeds keep jumping so quickly, odds are you will have it replaced before you even come close to running into issues with it.


-Nick | Gear | Flickr (external link) | 500px (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

5,552 views & 0 likes for this thread
What should I upgrade to optimize my Lightroom 4 performance?
FORUMS General Gear Talk Computers 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is kenf
750 guests, 302 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.