Mini pc: Will this mini pc run lightroom? Beelink GT-R Mini PC Windows 10 Pro,AMD Ryzen 5 3550H Processor(up to 3.7 GHz) 8GB DDR4 256GB NVMe SSD+1TB HDD,Radeon Vega 8 Graphics,WiFi...

AllenDpics Loc: Williamsburg Virginia

Will this mini pc run lightroom?

Beelink GT-R Mini PC Windows 10 Pro,AMD Ryzen 5 3550H Processor(up to 3.7 GHz) 8GB DDR4 256GB NVMe SSD+1TB HDD,Radeon Vega 8 Graphics,WiFi 6,Bluetooth 5.0,Dual Gigabit Ethernet,Gaming PC
by Beelink
Learn more: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08DQR5KFZ/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_5yHOFbVSV3CK6?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

PixelStan77 Loc: Vermont/Chicago

For lightroom you need at least 16 GB most use 32GB. This unit has only 8GB

AllenDpics Loc: Williamsburg Virginia

I can get it with 16 gigs of mem.

bsprague Loc: Lacey, WA, USA

Adobe's requirements are listed here: https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/system-requirements.html

I've run Classic on two different computers with 16 GB of RAM and have had no trouble. Not sure where PixelStan gets the information that "most use 32".

There is an Adobe sponsored Lightroom Classic forum with lots of users there. You might post your question there.

sodapop Loc: Bel Air, MD

I found that 16 GB was a bare minimum, was slow, and would not handle large panos. . I upgraded the computer to 32 GB and saw a dramatic improvement in overall speed and with panos. Yes, Practically all of the recommendations I have seen on UHH have been for 32 GB and I thank this group's comments which convinced me to upgrade

rcarol

PixelStan77 wrote:

For lightroom you need at least 16 GB most use 32GB. This unit has only 8GB

I run Lightroom on a Microsoft Surface Pro 7 with 8 GB of memory and it runs fine.

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

bsprague wrote:

Adobe's requirements are listed here: https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/system-requirements.html
I've run Classic on two different computers with 16 GB of RAM and have had no trouble. Not sure where PixelStan gets the information that "most use 32".

Most software providers minimum requirements are a joke. The software will run with the minimum hardware but will be as slow as a wet week. Most users typically use 32GB memory to make sure that memory is not a cause of slow-down (but note that there may well be other sources of performance issues). This is where PixelStan gets his figure.

EastendSteve Loc: New York Metropolitan Area

Then do that.

You'll also find that 1TB just won't do if you have lots of photos. I suggest you replace it with another SSD and use at least one large external drive (I also have an extra for backup that I normally keep powered off, for a number of reasons).

Opinion: Look into a faster machine for a similar price. I think it's possible, as I did and found one.

Ourspolair

With that Ryzen processor and the video processor, it is probably OK for Lightroom, but I would recommend a minimum of 16GB of ram.

AllenDpics Loc: Williamsburg Virginia

Thank you all. I was intrigued with the small form factor. I can probably build a better performing pc for about the same money.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

AllenDpics wrote:

Will this mini pc run lightroom?

Beelink GT-R Mini PC Windows 10 Pro,AMD Ryzen 5 3550H Processor(up to 3.7 GHz) 8GB DDR4 256GB NVMe SSD+1TB HDD,Radeon Vega 8 Graphics,WiFi 6,Bluetooth 5.0,Dual Gigabit Ethernet,Gaming PC
by Beelink
Learn more: https://www.amazon.com/dp/B08DQR5KFZ/ref=cm_sw_em_r_mt_dp_5yHOFbVSV3CK6?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

That is funny, an advertised "gaming" machine with only 8GB RAM. I know of a few English and French icons in Las Vegas, NV.

lamiaceae Loc: San Luis Obispo County, CA

rcarol wrote:

I run Lightroom on a Microsoft Surface Pro 7 with 8 GB of memory and it runs fine.

Can you work with a 1.4 GB Stitched Pano?

rcarol

lamiaceae wrote:

Can you work with a 1.4 GB Stitched Pano?

I don't know. Do you have one to send me? And why in the hell would I ever need a file that large?

chrissybabe Loc: New Zealand

rcarol wrote:

I don't know. Do you have one to send me? And why in the hell would I ever need a file that large?

Because you sure as hell might find that the next file you want to edit is that big !
A bit like buying a van to move furniture where you expect that none of it will be very big. Then find the next job actually needed a large truck.
Plus a whole heap of people are quite lazy and open screen after screen and never bother closing finished screens and then wonder why their editing job seems slower than usual.
There is no skill in running a computer with minimal everything just because you can. Although it is your time so there is that.
16GB minimum, 32GB if it fits (go without your morning coffee a few days to afford the added cost) and 64GB to have piece of mind in knowing that why ever your computer is running slow it sure ain't lack of memory.

rcarol

chrissybabe wrote:

Because you sure as hell might find that the next ... (show quote)

Gee Wizz, why limit the file size to 1.4 GB? Why not go for broke? I've never subscribed to the bigger is better philosophy. But if you do, so be it.