I noticed that LR clone and brush tool on my XEON E5-1650 0 3.20GHz (Attention: E5-1650 0 and not E5-1650 v4) can not stress my CPU and after x minutes of working LR slow down, until I have to restart it.
Please see the full diskussion with the problem here: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2210245 (test with different Lightroom versions, confrontation with a weak laptop, that works fine, tests wit other graphic grafic card, test with other bios settings etc. No results. Only restart LR or minor display resolution helps.)
Can anyone with an XEON E5-1650 0 3.2Ghz confirm this?
Please see the full diskussion with the problem here: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2210245 (test with different Lightroom versions, confrontation with a weak laptop, that works fine, tests wit other graphic grafic card, test with other bios settings etc. No results. Only restart LR or minor display resolution helps.)
Can anyone with an XEON E5-1650 0 3.2Ghz confirm this?
Posted 3 years ago
John R. Ellis, Champion
Reading through the extensive discussion in the other thread, two other troubleshooting steps come to mind:
- Does LR's memory usage as reported in Task Manager increase dramatically as it slows down? That's a typical symptom of a memory leak.
- Try restricting LR to running on 1, 2, 3, or 4 processors. Open a command prompt and paste this line:
- Does LR's memory usage as reported in Task Manager increase dramatically as it slows down? That's a typical symptom of a memory leak.
- Try restricting LR to running on 1, 2, 3, or 4 processors. Open a command prompt and paste this line:
start /affinity F cmd.exe /c "c:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom\lightroom.exe"An affinity mask of "F" specifies 4 processors; use "7" for 3 processors, "3" for 2 processors, and "1" for 1 processor. (The mask is a bit mask specified in hex.)
John R. Ellis, Champion
Note that the seemingly superfluous use of "cmd.exe" appears to be necessary due to the way that LR starts itself.
a) no memory usage not increase dramatically. Memory usage stay around 30 - 50 %. Never more.
b) with your tip I tried different number of cores. With 1 core: slower, with 2 cores slower, with 3 and with 4 cores faster. The problem is not resolved with 4 cores, but seams not so dramatically. The brush is smoother and a little faster than with all 6 cores. On images with not so much local corrections, the difference (4 cores to 6 cores) is bigger (4 cores faster than 6 cores). With images with many corrections, the difference is not so big.
Seams that core support is the crucial point in LR.
b) with your tip I tried different number of cores. With 1 core: slower, with 2 cores slower, with 3 and with 4 cores faster. The problem is not resolved with 4 cores, but seams not so dramatically. The brush is smoother and a little faster than with all 6 cores. On images with not so much local corrections, the difference (4 cores to 6 cores) is bigger (4 cores faster than 6 cores). With images with many corrections, the difference is not so big.
Seams that core support is the crucial point in LR.
John R. Ellis, Champion
I believe you indicated that with 6 cores, LR would slow down more and more after 3 photos, soon becoming unusable. With 2 or 3 cores, LR clearly will run slower; but does it get slower over time and then become unusable, or does it just stay slow without getting worse?
Unfortunaly my englisch is very bad.
a)
I would say: with 4 cores LR is faster than with 6 cores:
4 cores: faster and smoother
6 cores: slower and not so smooth
b)
Yes, LR does get slower over time and then become unusable:
with 4 cores: over more time
with 6 cores: over less time
No, when I do nothing, then no problem.
a)
I would say: with 4 cores LR is faster than with 6 cores:
4 cores: faster and smoother
6 cores: slower and not so smooth
b)
Yes, LR does get slower over time and then become unusable:
with 4 cores: over more time
with 6 cores: over less time
No, when I do nothing, then no problem.
John R. Ellis, Champion
Your English is quite sufficient!
Large numbers of people use LR with 4 cores (8 virtual processors). There have been a few reports on this forum of people successfully using 6, 8, and 10 cores (12, 16, and 20 virtual processors). So there must be something particular about your configuration or hardware.
Large numbers of people use LR with 4 cores (8 virtual processors). There have been a few reports on this forum of people successfully using 6, 8, and 10 cores (12, 16, and 20 virtual processors). So there must be something particular about your configuration or hardware.
But I find here in the forum also people using 6 and more cores with problems! Examples: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-2015-6-extremely-slow
But yes, I think it's a combination of LR-PC-Configuration.
I exclude the graphics card, because I have already tested with two different cards in the same PC. And I exclude drivers, because I have updated all system components.
Now I look for people who also have a XEON E5-1650 0 3.2Ghz and be able to report their experiences.
But yes, I think it's a combination of LR-PC-Configuration.
I exclude the graphics card, because I have already tested with two different cards in the same PC. And I exclude drivers, because I have updated all system components.
Now I look for people who also have a XEON E5-1650 0 3.2Ghz and be able to report their experiences.
(Edited)
I did some tests and can confirm this behaviour:
using a 6 (12) core i7 machine with a 4k display makes Lightroom nearly compleately non-usable!
reducing the used cores by the described command above and reducing the display resolution speeds LR up.
In my eyes it is absolutely inacceptable that the leading application for photography pros shows this behaviour. It's exactly this group of users who will use 4k displays and high performance PCs on which LR fails and slows down rapidly!
using a 6 (12) core i7 machine with a 4k display makes Lightroom nearly compleately non-usable!
reducing the used cores by the described command above and reducing the display resolution speeds LR up.
In my eyes it is absolutely inacceptable that the leading application for photography pros shows this behaviour. It's exactly this group of users who will use 4k displays and high performance PCs on which LR fails and slows down rapidly!
I specifically use a 4k screen for editing but also for coding since all the text is easier on the eyes for longer durations of times.
But seriously -- even if not photography 4k isn't really exotic anymore. It's mostly gamers that still buy 1080p screens.
What i would like to see is that the Develop Module in Lightroom is 100% dedicated to the task at hand. Editing photos shouldn't be anywhere near slow on a modern system.
But seriously -- even if not photography 4k isn't really exotic anymore. It's mostly gamers that still buy 1080p screens.
What i would like to see is that the Develop Module in Lightroom is 100% dedicated to the task at hand. Editing photos shouldn't be anywhere near slow on a modern system.
(Edited)
Thank you John R. Ellis! Did try the John R. Ellis solution, and so far LR CC runs smoothly for the first time in ages. If only I had known 3 years ago. I have had the lagging/sluggish issue for years, with different versions of LR (both CC and standalones), and always suggested memory leak as the culprit. For now, I made a .bat-file with John's line, and will test it thoroughly. So far Adobe have only suggested various work-arounds (smaller catalogs, no batch editing etc.), but reducing the core affiliation actually taste like a real solution (and pin-pointing a serious software issue)
w10x64 w/i7 3770K cpu @3.5ghz. OS, storage and scratch disks are on 3 separate 0-raided ssd's. The gpu is an amd r9 380. Asus Maximus V mobo
w10x64 w/i7 3770K cpu @3.5ghz. OS, storage and scratch disks are on 3 separate 0-raided ssd's. The gpu is an amd r9 380. Asus Maximus V mobo
John R. Ellis, Champion
What value did you use for the affinity mask?
Limiting the number of processors is an old debugging trick to help identify race conditions in multi-threaded programs. There's pretty clearly some problem with how LR uses multiple processors on some CPUs.
Limiting the number of processors is an old debugging trick to help identify race conditions in multi-threaded programs. There's pretty clearly some problem with how LR uses multiple processors on some CPUs.
Todd Shaner, Champion
John, are you saying using Windows Task Manger's 'Set Affinity' does not work with LR?
![]()
John R. Ellis, Champion
No. The use of "cmd.exe" is required with the "start" command, probably because of something funky LR does on its start up.
I don't think using the Task Manager to set affinity of a running LR process would be as good a test. It's possible that LR makes some decisions about how many processors to use early in its startup sequence, and setting affinity with the Task Manager would be too late.
I don't think using the Task Manager to set affinity of a running LR process would be as good a test. It's possible that LR makes some decisions about how many processors to use early in its startup sequence, and setting affinity with the Task Manager would be too late.
Todd Shaner, Champion
That makes sense. On startup LR determines the available processor cores and distributes the workload using a muli-processing algorithm. With 6 or more cores the algorithm fails and LR's performance drops. If this is the case then restricting the available cores on systems with 6 or more core processors should improve performance. I suggest also testing with hyperthreading both enabled and disabled in the system BIOS.
Puget Systems did similar testing of LR6, but they didn't run any benchmarks for Develop module control performance (Tone, Adjustment Brush, etc.).
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Lightroom-CC-6-Multi-Core-Performance-649/
Puget Systems did similar testing of LR6, but they didn't run any benchmarks for Develop module control performance (Tone, Adjustment Brush, etc.).
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Lightroom-CC-6-Multi-Core-Performance-649/
I had already tested with hyperthreading off. Slight improvement, but only very slightly...
Affinity has no point whatsoever. On my 6/12-core at least not. This is complete nonsense.
Lightroom uses all cores (all 12 logic cores) when exporting, creating 1:1 previews etc. While editing it uses for 1 core of power, maybe 2. I can set affinity to only 1 core and performance would not suffer mauch. But it would be huge difference on export. If U se GPU there is boost in performance regardless of number of cores. But for brush, I need to switch off GPU in settings. Which is annoying, and I do not do it always. Brushes doing ok under GPU, I just do not see what I'm, painting until I stop and area get overlay. For simple things I paint on "air". If I need to be precise, I turn GPU off. Annoying. SInce I use Lr only for "preset/auto" stff latelly I don't care anymoore. Adobe will lost one customer when my 1 year CC runs off. No point wasting my creative life here. 100's of replyes and no solution. It can't be...
Lightroom uses all cores (all 12 logic cores) when exporting, creating 1:1 previews etc. While editing it uses for 1 core of power, maybe 2. I can set affinity to only 1 core and performance would not suffer mauch. But it would be huge difference on export. If U se GPU there is boost in performance regardless of number of cores. But for brush, I need to switch off GPU in settings. Which is annoying, and I do not do it always. Brushes doing ok under GPU, I just do not see what I'm, painting until I stop and area get overlay. For simple things I paint on "air". If I need to be precise, I turn GPU off. Annoying. SInce I use Lr only for "preset/auto" stff latelly I don't care anymoore. Adobe will lost one customer when my 1 year CC runs off. No point wasting my creative life here. 100's of replyes and no solution. It can't be...
Also interesting: I have made all tested with photos of my D5100 (RAW 15 MB). Now, I tested with photos of my D800E (RAW 35 MB). The problem remain exact the same. It is interesting, that the problem is not aggravated with bigger images. Exact the same.
I think that this excludes memory problems.
I think that this excludes memory problems.
Todd Shaner, Champion
I ran a similar LR CC2015.7 test with Canon 5Ds 50 Megapixel raw files. The Basic controls and Adjustment Brush performance was very acceptable and virtually the same as when processing Cannon 5D MKII 21 Megapixel files. Given the 5Ds resolution is more than 2x the 5D MKII files I expected to see a proportional slow down (lag) in the controls and Adjustment Brush.
What I did notice is that CPU Usage never exceeds ~50% when using the Tone controls or Adjustment. When adjusting the Detail panel Luminance slider all 8 cores (4 core processor with Hyperthreading enabled) are at 100%. This is with an i7-860 quad-core processor:
What I did notice is that CPU Usage never exceeds ~50% when using the Tone controls or Adjustment. When adjusting the Detail panel Luminance slider all 8 cores (4 core processor with Hyperthreading enabled) are at 100%. This is with an i7-860 quad-core processor:
John R. Ellis, Champion
It isn't surprising that some sliders use parallelism more effectively than others. Adobe engineers have long indicated that much of the Camera Raw pipeline is inherently not easily parallelizable (thus, the difficulties of effectively using GPUs).
John R. Ellis, Champion
"I think that this excludes memory problems."
Agreed.
Agreed.
John R. Ellis, Champion
"But I find here in the forum also people using 6 and more cores with problems! Examples: https://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lightroom-2015-6-extremely-slow"
Thanks for finding that. I searched last night for similar reports but didn't find any. I'll consider whether to merge this topic in with the others. In general, it's important that all the reports of similar problems are merged into one thread, so that Adobe can properly appreciate the scope of the problem. But merging partially hides the existing replies.
Thanks for finding that. I searched last night for similar reports but didn't find any. I'll consider whether to merge this topic in with the others. In general, it's important that all the reports of similar problems are merged into one thread, so that Adobe can properly appreciate the scope of the problem. But merging partially hides the existing replies.
What I did notice is that CPU Usage never exceeds ~50% when using the Tone controls or Adjustment.I can confirm. Hyperthreading on/off no big difference.
I have just a horrific experience with performance and lightroom in Windows 10 with a Xeon CPU Desktop I built for Photo Editing in Lightroom/Photoshop and video editing.
Premier, Photoshop, work tremendously well - no issues.
Lightroom - a piece of garbage.
https://forums.adobe.com/message/9026722#9026722
Premier, Photoshop, work tremendously well - no issues.
Lightroom - a piece of garbage.
https://forums.adobe.com/message/9026722#9026722
I have an i7-5830K cpu and rendering 1:1 previews takes about 6/7 secs with 6/12 processors, but 10/12 secs using just 4/8 processors. So LR does seem to be able to use 6/12 processors efficiently.
Bob Frost
Todd Shaner, Champion
How does your system perform with extensive Adjustments Brush or Clone tool usage, Crop tool, Tone control slider response, Luminance slider response, or other performance issues after editing multiple image files. That's what the OP here is complaining about. More details: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2210245
I don't have any other slow problems, only preview rendering slowing down with time - overnight for example. I don't have a 4K monitor, but I can use the performance setting for gpu without problems. My graphics card is a Quadro K2000; NVidia and AMD cards often gave problems in the past since the drivers are designed for games. The Quadro drivers are designed for stability.
Bob frost
Todd Shaner, Champion
The OP here is using a Quadro K5000 with the latest drivers, so his issue is related to the 6-core Xeon processor. I'm using an i7-860 quad-core processor and low-end Quadro 600 graphics card. With GPU enabled the only issue I have is that it slows down the Adjustment Brush and Luminance slider so I generally keep it disabled. My modest system with 21 Megapixel raw files and a 2560 x 1440 monitor runs quite well, even when making extensive local adjustments to a large number of files. It's a mystery why some 6-core and higher systems have these performance issues.
Hello Robert, here my dng file: https://www.dropbox.com/s/d6811phy0qo...
Could you test and apply the same local corrections? Then in the develop module step to another photo, repeat this 20x, then return and make again extreme other local corrections. How does it look the speed? Especially in comparison to immediate LR start and after a few minutes of intense local adjustments. Thank you.
Could you test and apply the same local corrections? Then in the develop module step to another photo, repeat this 20x, then return and make again extreme other local corrections. How does it look the speed? Especially in comparison to immediate LR start and after a few minutes of intense local adjustments. Thank you.
I haven't tried editing your file, but I do have some evidence now to back up what you and others are saying. Normally, I only edit a few files at a time, and have no problems with speed other than rendering slowing down with time. But yesterday my wife wanted me to edit 40 files 'immediately' and print them. And towards the end of that LR did start misbehaving. It was slow doing anything, and sometimes showed me the wrong image in Develop; the develop screen was out of sync with the filmstrip and it took a few repeated clicks to get the right image on screen. Even in the print module it was showing the wrong image.
Bob Frost
Yes, that's also my experience. Once the system slow down, then also my system does exactly as you say. Then I musst restart Lightroom.
But it is not just Xeons; my cpu is a i7-5930K, 6/12 core. Next time I have a lot of nefs to edit, I will try again with the cpu affinity set to 4/8 core for LR.
Bob frost
Todd Shaner, Champion
Agreed. We've seen reports with this type of performance issue from users with Intel i7 and Xeon processors as well as AMD processors. The one common element is that their processors are six or more cores.
My CPU is 4 core Xeon 1620 v3 and I have the same problem. While working, LR is gradually becoming slowlier but the task manager says only about 25 - 35% of my system resources are used (I have 32GB RAM). Weird :(
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
When Lr starts to getting slower, in addition to the RAM usage, can you check in the Windows Task Manager and note what the reported Lightroom usage for the GDI Objects, Threads, Handles and User Objects?
I observe the same (slowdown of LRwith more editing) problem on i7/4 core MacBook. All adjustments are basic (no healing brushes or selective adjustments).
I observe the same (slowdown of LRwith more editing) problem on i7/4 core MacBook. All adjustments are basic (no healing brushes or selective adjustments).
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
@Dietmar reported that the issue is found to be in 2015.5, 2015.5.1, 2015.6, 2015.6.1 as well. It would be helpful to post the Lightroom's Help>System Info...
I started having slow performance issues around August of this year - 2016 - It was after an update was installed, but I do not recall what the version number was!
John R. Ellis, Champion
LR CC 2015.6.1 was released 7/25. So you might consider rolling back to 2015.6: https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/roll-back-to-prior-update.html
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
@Dietmar You've provided additional detailed info in https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2210245. That is very helpful. Are the summary of your previous findings (copied as-is) still applies with the Lr 2015.7 and Camera Raw 9.7 release?
Summary
Summary
- LR/Camera Raw has definitive a performance problem with some - especially my high-quality – PCs!
- I can reproduce the problem and I can demonstrate that the problem on other - especially my weak – PCs not persist or is not so strongly.
- With GPU on the problem increase drastically!
- Camera RAW from Bridge and Photoshop have the same problem.
- With higher lightroom version the problem increase! Also with the newest 2015.6.1!
- Camera Raw Cache amll/big. No difference.
- Minimize LR, not helps or helps only minimal.
- Downgrade helps a little, but not eliminate the problem in general.
- Restart LR, helps but restart LR every X images are not a good workaround!
- It is very frustrating that with LR my weakness machine is better than my best PC!
You found my system info under: https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2210245
Yes the same with LR 2015.7. The problem with 2015.7 seams a
little increased (=I can reproduce it faster!)
I can reproduce the observation that LR is performant right after a launch and
then gets slower after intense brushing also with one single photo, but
with walk over several photos I can reproduce it faster.
I tuned off all: sync, face recognition etc.
Now I will extent the summary:
1. Different photo
type of different cameras: no difference
2. Now I'm not sure that a reduction of CPU kernels helps a lot. I tested with:
start /affinity F cmd.exe /c "c:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom\lightroom.exe"
and also with the tool "Process lasso".
Seems that not help much. Helps only a little to increase the time until
the problem occurs. Or on 2015.7 helps fewer than with 2015.6.1 (I mad my first
tests with 2015.6.1, now with 2015.7)
3. The problem is not only a brush or a clone problem. It is a general
problem in the develop module when I must elaborate many photos in one session.
But with brush and clone tool I can reproduce it very fast!
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
Is it reproducible in Camera Raw 9.7?
My main complaint in the past few years has been about the slowdown in rendering 1:1 previews of my 40MB nefs. However, some tests yesterday showed that this may have been cured somewhere along the update line to CC 2015.7
I selected 2700 40MB nefs (D810) without any edits (I reimported them into a separate folder and allowed LR to settle down for an hour or so), and then started rendering 1:1 previews (after allowing LR to render the standard previews as part of the import.)
At first they were taking about 4.0 secs per image, but soon settled down to 5.0 secs per image. They stayed at 5 secs until the completion in about 3.5 hrs. No slowdown with the i7-5930 6/12 core cpu (all 12 logical processors in use according to system info).
Then I ran LR (CC 2015.7) again (after deleting the 1:1 previews, restarting LR and allowing it to settle down again), but with the affinity set to FF (using logical processors 0-7). LR system info then said it was using 8 logical processors out of the 12 available. The time at start for each image was 4.6 secs, but soon settled down again to 5 secs, and stayed at 5 secs to the end.
Conclusions: No slowdown in rendering over 3.5 hrs, and no significant effect of using 4/8 cores or 6/12 cores. So my old problem seems to have been solved. I must do a big run sometime - overnight and see what happens then, but I'm optimistic.
But I haven't tested simply editing a load of files in succession with 8 or 12 cores. More coffee or something stronger needed for that!
Bob Frost
@Simon Chen: yes it is reproducible in Camera Raw 9.7.
CORRECTION! My old problem of 1:1 rendering slowing down with time only seems to be true if the nefs are unedited.
I just repeated one run with LR using just 8 cores, but with the following edits (Autotune/Punch10/Sharpen/CameraNeutral/Noise/LensCorrection/ WBAuto/GradFilter/8Spotsremove). I edited the first file and then pasted the edits to the rest of the 2700 nefs, and re-rendered standard previews.
When LR had settled down, I then rendered 1:1 previews of the 2700 files. At start the edited images were taking 12 secs to render, BUT after only 1000 images they were taking 20 secs to render!!
I stopped the rendering and restarted LR and the rendering was back to 12 secs. That has been my experience in the past; so the increase in rendering time has something to do with rendering the edits.
I'll repeat this with all 12 cores used in LR tomorrow.
Bob Frost
(Edited)
Same with 6/12 cores used in LR; 10 secs for rendering 40MB nefs + edits at start, and 25 secs after rendering 1000 images.
So its something to do with the edits that is slowing down rendering with time, not the no of cores.
Any ideas, Simon?
Bob Frost
(Edited)
Attention: your tests are renderung, my tests are edits. It is not the same.
Yes you are right. Has do do with edits!
But why the PC goes slower and slower also when I step to another photo? And why the PC not return fast when the CPU utilization goes to zero? And why I can not reproduce the problem on my weak PC?
I think the problem is more complex: has do do with edits, CPU number, resolution etc. In my opinion, a fundamental problem in the kernel programming...
I hope in a revision of kernel programming of LR...
Yes you are right. Has do do with edits!
But why the PC goes slower and slower also when I step to another photo? And why the PC not return fast when the CPU utilization goes to zero? And why I can not reproduce the problem on my weak PC?
I think the problem is more complex: has do do with edits, CPU number, resolution etc. In my opinion, a fundamental problem in the kernel programming...
I hope in a revision of kernel programming of LR...
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
Our engineers are looking into this. Is your known method to "reclaim" some speed back is to restart Lightroom/ACR?
@Dietmar For your Lightroom slow down issue, could you try the following
@Dietmar For your Lightroom slow down issue, could you try the following
- Open Lightroom.
- Invoke Lightroom > Preferences... menu command
- When the Preferences dialog appears, select the Presets tab.
- Click on the button labeled “Show Lightroom Presets Folder...”
- Lightroom will reveal the root preset folder in the Finder/Explorer.
- Now goto http://adobe.ly/2cEF782 and download the config.lua file and copy it into the root preset folder (under "Lightroom") at step 5. The config.lua file will reconfigure some Lightroom RAM usages for caching.
- Relaunch Lr and follow your normal routines to reproduce the issue to see if it improves. You can also try to tweak the numbers to see if it makes any difference.
- Remove or rename the config.lua from the root preset folder after the experiment (to restore to the original Lr 6.7 behavior).
For my rendering slow-down, the only way to reclaim speed is to restart LR. Simply stopping rendering and letting LR settle down and then restarting rendering does not speed things up. I'll let Dietmar deal with the editing slow-down.
Bob F
(Edited)
@Simon Chen
a)
Yes, I can "reclaim" the speed with restart of Lightroom
b)
Now I tested your suggestion with the config.lua file.
Result: unfortunately no solution :-(
a)
Yes, I can "reclaim" the speed with restart of Lightroom
b)
Now I tested your suggestion with the config.lua file.
Result: unfortunately no solution :-(
Todd Shaner, Champion
Simon, what exactly does the config.lua file do? You also mention tweaking the numbers, but what do they mean and how should you change the values?
AgGCCache.mainCacheFactor = 0.1
AgNegativeCache.factorOfAddressSpace = 0.01
AgGCCache.mainCacheFactor = 0.1
AgNegativeCache.factorOfAddressSpace = 0.01
I think I forgot an important point on my summary (in the adobe forum I have said it):
Point 11: When I reduce the resolution of my the display to 1280x1024 that helps a lot. Then slow down only after more time...
I would say that the problem "slow down" has to do with not only with cpu, but also with display resolution ( but not with graphic cards or driver because I tested with different graphic cards).
P.S. Is here anyone from Adobe? I wonder if it makes sense post experiences, or it is lost time? A statement: We know the problem and working on it, would help;-)
Point 11: When I reduce the resolution of my the display to 1280x1024 that helps a lot. Then slow down only after more time...
I would say that the problem "slow down" has to do with not only with cpu, but also with display resolution ( but not with graphic cards or driver because I tested with different graphic cards).
P.S. Is here anyone from Adobe? I wonder if it makes sense post experiences, or it is lost time? A statement: We know the problem and working on it, would help;-)
everything you have just said has been reported before:
slowness on hi resolution displays.
slowdown after working on some images and need to restart
the new thing is that you managed to narrow the decreasing performance problem to more than 4 CPU's which is a progress.
also there is a significant reduction in the speed of image export if lightroom was open and some image editing was done prior to the export. if you want fast export then restart lightroom then do the export or press the publish button.
Adobe at least tell us if you can replicate the problem or not and stop wasting our time on this forum.
don't keep us in the dark!
I live near the Adobe HQ in Maidenhead Berkshire, UK. I can bring my computer to you and show you all those issues. we can install testing software on it. anything you need. my copmuter is i7 5960X 8 core + 4K display which has similar issues to the xeon CPUs
let me know.
slowness on hi resolution displays.
slowdown after working on some images and need to restart
the new thing is that you managed to narrow the decreasing performance problem to more than 4 CPU's which is a progress.
also there is a significant reduction in the speed of image export if lightroom was open and some image editing was done prior to the export. if you want fast export then restart lightroom then do the export or press the publish button.
Adobe at least tell us if you can replicate the problem or not and stop wasting our time on this forum.
don't keep us in the dark!
I live near the Adobe HQ in Maidenhead Berkshire, UK. I can bring my computer to you and show you all those issues. we can install testing software on it. anything you need. my copmuter is i7 5960X 8 core + 4K display which has similar issues to the xeon CPUs
let me know.
(Edited)
There seems to have been no change in this problem since my last thread on this subject in June 2015.
Bob Frost
Servus Dietmar,
I'm using LR on an i7 6 core machine and after upgrading to a 4k display I'm experiencing similar massive performance problems.
I'm using LR on an i7 6 core machine and after upgrading to a 4k display I'm experiencing similar massive performance problems.
Same here and I've recently upgraded to a 10 core machine with a 4K display. It is so slow processing after the first few images that I just gave up. I'm using C1 in the interim until there is some sort of fix out.
I have a 4k display with an 8 core i-7 with 24GB RAM and I am basically dead in the water - I have been editing the same wedding since last Wednesday (5 days so far - 1800 .nef's!)
I can not live like this! I will have to go back to using the Photoshop Image processor if this does not change soon!
I can not live like this! I will have to go back to using the Photoshop Image processor if this does not change soon!
Here is an interesting article on Lightrooms performance with differing core number -
https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/articles/Adobe-Lightroom-CC-6-Multi-Core-Performance-649/
Bob frost
Todd Shaner, Champion
The problem with that article is that no "editing" benchmarks were tested, such as using the Adjustment Brush and Clone tool, etc. I'm sure if they did the issues reported here would have surfaced. The benchmarks do clearly indicate there's little to be gained going beyond 4-cores.
Todd Shaner, Champion
The above link references performance issues with a Xeon 6-core system that only started after updating from LR 6.6.1 to 6.7. Rolling back to 6.6.1 resolved the issues for this user.
i7 -3770k w Win10 here with 16 GB RAM, Sapphire 7850 @ 1920x1200; latest Lightroom 6.7 on fast SSD with plenty of free space. Same issues: over about 20 spot adjustments and brushes on a single photography LR starts lagging terribly.
Using a brush it takes up to 20/30 seconds just for the red overlay to display over the area I just brushed. Same for additional spot tool edits. LR basically becomes unusable.
Hw acceleration on or off does not make any significant difference.
Frankly speaking it is unacceptable for a professional photography software as LR is supposed to be.
Even more it seems there is no developer feedback on this matter.
Not exactly the type of support you'd expect.
Using a brush it takes up to 20/30 seconds just for the red overlay to display over the area I just brushed. Same for additional spot tool edits. LR basically becomes unusable.
Hw acceleration on or off does not make any significant difference.
Frankly speaking it is unacceptable for a professional photography software as LR is supposed to be.
Even more it seems there is no developer feedback on this matter.
Not exactly the type of support you'd expect.
Same problem Dawid.. I have Macbook Pro I5 2.9Ghz SSD 512, Ram 8go..
I upgraded my machine from an I7 4790 and 16gb of ram with a 1tb SSD drive to one with an I7 6700HQ 64gb RAM and two 1tb SSD drives - keeping the cache on a separate drive. I did this because I thought I had worn out the old machine because LR CC had started to run so slowly. It runs just as slowly on the new machine and it is becoming extremely frustrating.
When will Adobe address this issue?
When will Adobe address this issue?
Todd Shaner, Champion
According to PassMark's benchmarks the i7-6700HQ (8,023) is a lower performance processor than your previous i7-4790 (9,995). Also moving caches to a separate SSD has very little affect on LR's performance. What exact version of LR are you using, what OS version, what is your monitor's resolution, and are you using dual-displays?
Actually the mobile 4790 - I read it is somewhat of a wash.
I'm on a 17" laptop, no dual displays, WIN 10 Anniversary edition and the latest update to LR 6. It's been creeping since the spring starting on the old machine which had been upgraded over and over. I thought the brand new build and hardware would change things.
One thing did help a little after reading this thread yesterday was turning off the GPU on my Invidia 1070 video card for Lightroom. I used the Invidia settings. It still lags a little when going from one photo to the next or pasting settings or adjustment brushing any amount at all, but not the four or five seconds it was taking.
In all, we shouldn't even be having this conversation. LR has an issue that we should not have to tweak away.
I'm on a 17" laptop, no dual displays, WIN 10 Anniversary edition and the latest update to LR 6. It's been creeping since the spring starting on the old machine which had been upgraded over and over. I thought the brand new build and hardware would change things.
One thing did help a little after reading this thread yesterday was turning off the GPU on my Invidia 1070 video card for Lightroom. I used the Invidia settings. It still lags a little when going from one photo to the next or pasting settings or adjustment brushing any amount at all, but not the four or five seconds it was taking.
In all, we shouldn't even be having this conversation. LR has an issue that we should not have to tweak away.
Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist
Dietmar Mitterer Zublasing
Hagens World Photography
Igor Socha