Olympus UK E-System User Group
Olympus UK E-System User Group

Join our unique resource for Olympus Four Thirds E-System DSLR and Pen and OM-D Micro Four Thirds photographers. Show your images via our free e-group photo gallery. Please read the e-group.uk.net forum terms and conditions before posting for the first time. Above all, welcome!


Go Back   Olympus UK E-System User Group > Cameras, lenses and system accessories > Software

Software Discuss Olympus Master, Studio and Viewer software applications as well as third party programs like Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom, Apple Aperture, and others.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 29th August 2011
Rawcoll's Avatar
Rawcoll Rawcoll is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 381
Thanks: 26
Thanked 62 Times in 34 Posts
Likes: 25
Liked 46 Times in 28 Posts
Speed or cores?

Hi all

With the size of raw files that I'm currently processing (.RW2's approach 20 megs) I'm finding that Lightroom 3.4 takes some 10-15 seconds to generate each 1:1 preview, and the same again when I switch to Develop.

I'm currently running an Athlon 64x Dual, 2.61 GHz, with Windows XP SP2 (i.e 32 bit), and with the ram maxed out. At some point in the near future I shall need to upgrade, but I'm wondering what attribute will be required: high clock speed or many cores, given that I tend not to batch process except when I export as tiffs for final editing? I am not even sure how well LR is at using cores anyway. A 64 bit operating system assumed.

Anyone any experience?

Ian
__________________
Ian

(I can never think of anything witty to say when under pressure!)

GH2, G50, various m4/3rds lenses, Fuji X-T1 system

My website: www.icimaging.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 30th August 2011
JohnF JohnF is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Oberstedten, Germany
Posts: 56
Thanks: 61
Thanked 8 Times in 4 Posts
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times in 0 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

Hi-

I went to 6 cores recently (AMD) and it's great when your software supports it. I run the gigapan stitching software and it took over all 6 cores and maxed them to 100%: a stitch that once took 22 hours on a dual core Pentium was completed in something like 3-4 hours. Win 7 64 bit, with 12 GB of RAM.

JohnF
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 30th August 2011
timg timg is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cornwall, UK
Posts: 1,208
Thanks: 43
Thanked 115 Times in 110 Posts
Likes: 13
Liked 73 Times in 38 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

The Core-i7 2600k is current king of speed (unless you're talking silly money)...

The latest Custom PC magazine had a 'fastest ever hardware' section and the i7 chip racked up 2,700 points in their media benchmark (photo/video editing) while the AMD Phenom II 1100T could only muster 1,600... remember that Custom PC do tend to overclock the hardware as fast as it will go.

Also remember that (finally) the brand new AMD chips are just around the corner so unless you're desperate for a new machine right away it might be an idea to see how well they benchmark.

Definitely go for Windows 7 64 bit with as much RAM as you can throw at it.
__________________
GX7, EP3, 9-18, 14-45, 45-150, 20 1.7, 25 1.4, 45 1.8, FL36 & various OM glass. flickr
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 31st August 2011
Rawcoll's Avatar
Rawcoll Rawcoll is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 381
Thanks: 26
Thanked 62 Times in 34 Posts
Likes: 25
Liked 46 Times in 28 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

Thanks both.

JohnF that certainly is a vast improvement . As a matter of interest what processor speed do you have? I suppose it all depends on whether LR can make use of available cores. I read subsequently on the Luminous Landscape forum that it can, in the sense that preview building is speeded up because images can be processed simultaneously. I'm not sure that the number of cores can have any influence on the time it takes for each image to be processed though, or for each operation to be performed.

Quote:
Also remember that (finally) the brand new AMD chips are just around the corner
I'm afraid I'm not up to speed (no pun intended) with computer hardware. What is the new incarnation of the AMD processor Timg? I'm fortunately not in any great hurry to replace my kit (I hope that saying that hasn't put the mockers on it!)

Regards
__________________
Ian

(I can never think of anything witty to say when under pressure!)

GH2, G50, various m4/3rds lenses, Fuji X-T1 system

My website: www.icimaging.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 31st August 2011
timg timg is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cornwall, UK
Posts: 1,208
Thanks: 43
Thanked 115 Times in 110 Posts
Likes: 13
Liked 73 Times in 38 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawcoll View Post
I'm afraid I'm not up to speed (no pun intended) with computer hardware. What is the new incarnation of the AMD processor Timg? I'm fortunately not in any great hurry to replace my kit (I hope that saying that hasn't put the mockers on it!)
The new processors are called Zambezi, based on the Bulldozer architecture (though what the marketing people will call them when they're finally announced, who knows!)... it's the first really new design from AMD for years and will hopefully see them catch up a bit with Intel... I always used to buy AMD chips but lately they just can't keep up.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardwar...he-next-week/1

As always, I'd wait to see some real-life tests before splashing out... the guys at bit-tech really do know their stuff and are pretty spot on with their conclusions.
__________________
GX7, EP3, 9-18, 14-45, 45-150, 20 1.7, 25 1.4, 45 1.8, FL36 & various OM glass. flickr
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 31st August 2011
Ulfric M Douglas Ulfric M Douglas is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 2,895
Thanks: 263
Thanked 234 Times in 215 Posts
Likes: 128
Liked 172 Times in 119 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

I was about to post about how that sounds like too long, then I check it on mine ...
Lightroom is simply CLUNKY, compared to anything made before everyone started programming in high-level languages : read LAZY long-cut stuff.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 1st September 2011
Kiwi Paul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Speed or cores?

I have an 4 core i7 870 running at 3.3Ghz on a not too expensive Gigabyte motherboard with 8GB ram and a SSD. I'm running W7 64bit.
Developing G3 RAW files (16Mb) in LR3.5 is pretty much instantaneous and loading 1:1 previews takes maybe a second or 2 to load.

Paul
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 1st September 2011
StephenL's Avatar
StephenL StephenL is offline
Senior Pixelmonger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 9,863
Thanks: 984
Thanked 1,126 Times in 921 Posts
Likes: 658
Liked 755 Times in 499 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

I have a lowly i3 with 8Gb ram, W7 64 bit. Lightroom seems plenty fast enough to me and loads in 2 or 3 seconds.
__________________
Stephen

A camera takes a picture. A photographer makes a picture

Fuji X system, + Leica and Bronica film

My Flickr site
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 1st September 2011
yorky's Avatar
yorky yorky is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Halifax. West Yorkshire
Posts: 1,451
Thanks: 200
Thanked 70 Times in 66 Posts
Likes: 89
Liked 43 Times in 34 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

What do any of u think of this for graphics?

me
/
Systems
/
Systems
/
All CCL Systems
/

CCL's Little Devil Complete System Image
View larger image

send to a friend Share this
CCL's Little Devil Complete System CCL0050

New System!!

Intel Core i5-2400 3.1GHz Processor
8GB Kingston DDR3
1TB SATA II Hard Drive
Intel HD On-Board Graphics
12 Mths Warranty
Installed with Windows 7 Home
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 1st September 2011
StephenL's Avatar
StephenL StephenL is offline
Senior Pixelmonger
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yorkshire Dales
Posts: 9,863
Thanks: 984
Thanked 1,126 Times in 921 Posts
Likes: 658
Liked 755 Times in 499 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

I always shy away from onboard graphics. They steal memory from your installed ram, instead of using their own.
__________________
Stephen

A camera takes a picture. A photographer makes a picture

Fuji X system, + Leica and Bronica film

My Flickr site
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 1st September 2011
Rawcoll's Avatar
Rawcoll Rawcoll is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Oxfordshire
Posts: 381
Thanks: 26
Thanked 62 Times in 34 Posts
Likes: 25
Liked 46 Times in 28 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

Paul and Stephen, thanks for that. They provide a useful yardstick, and it would seem that a reasonably fast 4-core machine would be more than adequate (and a darn sight cheaper that going up to a 6 core processor).

Paul, do you think that the SSD contributes much to your speed? I presume that you don't use this for your main image storage do you? I was wondering whether this was worth adopting in my future PC.

Ulfric I have vague memories of there being a lot of talk on forums about the slowness of LR3 when it was introduced, but it seemed to be very variable, in that some folk suffered much whereas others didn't. I've not found it too bad, with 10Mb raws, but it did grind almost to a halt when I was doing a lot of cloning (but then I also only had 2Gb of ram).

Regards
__________________
Ian

(I can never think of anything witty to say when under pressure!)

GH2, G50, various m4/3rds lenses, Fuji X-T1 system

My website: www.icimaging.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 1st September 2011
Kiwi Paul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Speed or cores?

Hard for me to say, I think so, but I built the system from scratch and never ran it with a HDD for comparison but if you are building a new PC today I would absolutely recommend using a SSD as the system drive and a large HDD as a storage drive, that's what I have done. I also bought the fastest memory to suit the motherboard and processor, I bought a fairly middle of the road motherboard, it works fine but in hindsight maybe I should have spent an extra 50 or so and bought a better one, whether it would have made a noticeable difference or not I don't know but it always nags me.

Paul

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rawcoll View Post
Paul, do you think that the SSD contributes much to your speed? I presume that you don't use this for your main image storage do you? I was wondering whether this was worth adopting in my future PC.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 1st September 2011
Ian's Avatar
Ian Ian is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Hemel Hempstead, Hertfordshire, UK
Posts: 11,672
Thanks: 427
Thanked 2,554 Times in 1,283 Posts
Likes: 885
Liked 1,766 Times in 797 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

There was a concern that SSD drives would 'wear' out as the flash memory cells apparently have a duty cycle limit. But I'm not hearing this much these days.

I have a (now) relatively modest AMD 64 X2 5600+ (2.8GHz) and 4GB of DRAM running on an Asus motherboard, which I built myself about 4 years ago. I can't honestly say it feels slow, although it's a fair bit faster than the older desktops the family has used and the various laptops we have.

I do think it would be interesting to see how an SSD for the OS (Windows XP 32-bit, believe it or not!) would boost things in place of the conventional hard drive.

What size SSD are you running Paul?

Ian
__________________
Founder and editor of:
Olympus UK E-System User Group (http://e-group.uk.net)
Four Thirds User (http://fourthirds-user.com)
Digital Photography Now (http://dpnow.com)
Olympus camera, lens, and accessory hire (http://e-group.uk.net/hire)

Twitter: www.twitter.com/ian_burley
Flickr: www.flickr.com/photos/dpnow/
Pinterest: www.pinterest.com/ianburley/
NEW: My personal BLOG ianburley.com
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 1st September 2011
Kiwi Paul
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Re: Speed or cores?

I don't think there is any longer an issue with wearing out the SSD's, the MTBF is such that you would have replaced it before it wears out.
I'm running a 64GB SSD which is fine for my applications, it's half full (or half empty if your an optimist lol ;-).
My PC is certainly very nippy and I'm very happy with it's performance.
It didn't cost me a fortune either, the last one I built lasted me nearly 4 years before I upgraded to my current one so I tend to build a fairly fast PC knowing it will serve me for several years before another upgrade is required (or temptation gets the better of me haha).

Paul

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
There was a concern that SSD drives would 'wear' out as the flash memory cells apparently have a duty cycle limit. But I'm not hearing this much these days.

I have a (now) relatively modest AMD 64 X2 5600+ (2.8GHz) and 4GB of DRAM running on an Asus motherboard, which I built myself about 4 years ago. I can't honestly say it feels slow, although it's a fair bit faster than the older desktops the family has used and the various laptops we have.

I do think it would be interesting to see how an SSD for the OS (Windows XP 32-bit, believe it or not!) would boost things in place of the conventional hard drive.

What size SSD are you running Paul?

Ian
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 1st September 2011
timg timg is offline
Full member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Cornwall, UK
Posts: 1,208
Thanks: 43
Thanked 115 Times in 110 Posts
Likes: 13
Liked 73 Times in 38 Posts
Re: Speed or cores?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian View Post
There was a concern that SSD drives would 'wear' out as the flash memory cells apparently have a duty cycle limit. But I'm not hearing this much these days.
They did some tests over at bit-tech and worked out you'd need to hammer an SSD continuously 24 hours a day for 10 years to "wear it out" and even then you can still read from it, it's only writing that gets affected.

I too run an SSD for the OS and it does make it a lot "snappier"... as soon as the prices drop I'm buying a bigger one!
__________________
GX7, EP3, 9-18, 14-45, 45-150, 20 1.7, 25 1.4, 45 1.8, FL36 & various OM glass. flickr
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Please don't speed. Barr1e The lounge 5 31st March 2014 02:34 PM
HLD-4 and focus speed with the E-5 Ian Olympus E-5 8 3rd February 2013 09:08 PM
what speed CF card for E620 Kittykat23uk Olympus E-620/600 9 24th August 2010 12:34 PM
AF speed in E system cameras PaulE Camera conference 9 2nd June 2010 10:31 PM
HELP! 50-500 Focusing Speed too slow anoopaa Telephoto 1 10th March 2010 05:30 PM


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:22 AM.


The Write Technology Ltd, 2007-2019, All rights reservedAd Management plugin by RedTyger