Ugly Hedgehog® - Photography Forum
i5 vs. i7 Core CPU for Post-Processing
Page: <<prev 1 2 3
Dec 2, 2019 14:49:41   #
SuperflyTNT Loc: Manassas VA
 
Chromodynamics6 wrote:
I'm not disputing anyone's experience but after I built my system I used a couple of performance monitors as well as the Windows performance monitor while using both LR, PS and Adobe Premiere Elements and found there was very little demand on RAM. I bought 32gb DDR4 (4x8) and have never seen the demand go beyond 6gb. I had the need for a second pc and removed 16gb from the first and used it in the second one we built two months later. Removing the 16gb made absolutely no difference in performance according to what is seen while monitoring.
I'm not disputing anyone's experience but after I ... (show quote)


Are you working on single images or opening several images at once. Simple edits on single images won't make much difference, but working with multiple images and doing intensive operations like stitching pano's and focus stacking it will make a difference.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 14:54:44   #
rck281 Loc: Overland Park, KS
 
Intel 10th generation CPU's are currently only in laptops. The desktop CPU's will be released soon.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 16:03:19   #
NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC
 
Yes.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 16:30:22   #
PGHphoto Loc: Pittsburgh, PA
 
wthomson wrote:
Is the price difference between the i5 and i7 Core CPU worth it? I use Photoshop and Lightroom for single image post and need to upgrade my Mac products. The price difference seems to run about $200.

Thanks.


The i7 has greater on-board cache and usually marginally higher clock speed. Base i7's also have hyperthreading 'turned on' . My experience is that its not worth the additional expense when it comes to Lightroom and Photoshop. Most apps do not use hyperthreading in the windows environment. Not sure about Mac's. I would save the money and go for higher/faster RAM and SSD - you will see an immediate benefit of doing that when it comes to photoshop and lightroom.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 16:57:06   #
Merlin1300 Loc: New England, But Now & Forever SoTX
 
No stock computer I know of comes with: an SSD for the OS and high maintenance programs (System = C: drive), a high capacity rotating drive for Data and infrequently used, or low maintenance programs, AND a separate SSD for the Winblows Swap File (which is why I build my own). Having a separate SSD for the Swap File / Photoshop Scratch Disk permits simultaneous access to the program files while reading/writing intermediate data to the swap file while processing. This prevents delays caused by attempts at simultaneous read-write access to a single drive.
I built Mjolnir in 2015. The system configuration was similar, with updated components, but with SLI graphics overkill, to the my previous computer (Lightning) built in 2011 (which still runs - as does the computer I built in 1995 running Win 311 )
https://www.uglyhedgehog.com/t-496767-1.html

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 20:06:15   #
Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)
 
TriX wrote:
I’m with you Gene, I wouldn't spend the $ for a Xeon either in most cases, but there are some bargains out there - threw it in for those few among us that like to build (or buy used) dual Xeon servers. There are also some bargains out there in $/performance with some of the new AMD devices. AMD often has more cores for the $ (and also some run quite hot), but while I have built a number os AMD-based machines over the years, I have never tried one for a PP machine. If anyone out there is using an AMD Threadripper or Ryzen series CPU for PP, I’d love to hear your experience. Anyway, if you want the real benchmarks on CPU performance vs price, take a look at this link - some real surprises (and bargains) out there: https://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html
I’m with you Gene, I wouldn't spend the $ for a Xe... (show quote)


I'm still using an i7 2600K running mildly overclocked at about 5 ghz with liquid cooling. Most of the time it runs at a cool 40°C on all four cores. When I do a DXO Prime noise reduction or a big pano stitch or apply a fair amount of blur to an image - it gets hot. I will likely build a new system based on an Intel i9 9900K - affordable (but not right now) and fast enough for my needs. CPU speed, as you know, is just a part of the performance experience of a system. Fast enough with m.2 drives 32 gb or more ram, and a mid-range graphics card with enough ram to drive my two displays - and hopefully something I can put together for under $2000, is all I am going to need.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 20:55:02   #
gouldopfl
 
I would use an AMD Ryzen 9 3960x available next month. All testing blows the doors off of Intel who are in a serious fight to climb back into the desktop and server market. Intel has not been able to get past 14+ nm manufacturing. To many failures at 10 nm. AMD is at 7nm, soon to 7+ and to 4nm by 2022. AMD now has up to 64 cores and 128 threads.

| Reply
Dec 2, 2019 21:36:05   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
gouldopfl wrote:
I would use an AMD Ryzen 9 3960x available next month. All testing blows the doors off of Intel who are in a serious fight to climb back into the desktop and server market. Intel has not been able to get past 14+ nm manufacturing. To many failures at 10 nm. AMD is at 7nm, soon to 7+ and to 4nm by 2022. AMD now has up to 64 cores and 128 threads.


I am pleased that AMD is back in the game, but not sure If I’d build a 3960x. I’m not sure that the PP aps I use are sufficiently parallelized to utilize 24 cores effectively, and then there’s the $1400 price (and expensive MB) and the 280W power dissipation that really calls for water cooling (and a good sized radiator 😹). Having said that, the Threaddrippers and Ryzens are certainly interesting CPUs.

| Reply
Dec 3, 2019 00:11:23   #
AndyGarcia
 
On the nail. Just fitted a 2TB SSD into my late 2012 MacMini (already maxed out on RAM) transformed performance.

An old friend years ago said the same thing - RAM is vv important more than CPU.

| Reply
Dec 3, 2019 23:29:38   #
fstoprookie Loc: Central Valley of California
 
Just got my 2019 27" iMac i5 6 core and put 64 GB of ddr4 2666mhz memory. It smokes my picture processing. I will move to 128GB memory soon to max out my memory. Expect to have this tell I am not able to do photography any more (I'm in my mid 70's).

| Reply
Dec 4, 2019 20:52:16   #
Photoguy120
 
wthomson wrote:
Is the price difference between the i5 and i7 Core CPU worth it? I use Photoshop and Lightroom for single image post and need to upgrade my Mac products. The price difference seems to run about $200.

Thanks.


CPU is third on the consideration list. RAM and RAM on video card are first.

| Reply
Dec 26, 2019 18:17:56   #
gouldopfl
 
Intel has fallen far behind AMD. I've been on the computer business for over 35 years. Intel is stuck on 12nm and 14nm dies and they have not been able to get to 10nm. The smaller the die size the faster the CPU's are, the more cores and threads can be created. AMD is currently at 7nm, working on 7++ nm and are taking 5nm samples. AMD has surpassed Intel in desktops and is putting a hurt on Intel because Intel is months behind on inventory. Currently you can get an AMD with 16 cores and 32 threads and soon 32 cores and 64 threads.

| Reply
Dec 26, 2019 18:35:29   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
Photoguy120 wrote:
CPU is third on the consideration list. RAM and RAM on video card are first.


Fourth behind disk speed. Many operations are I/O, not CPU bound.

Btw, unless you do video, not sure it makes any $/performance sense to go beyond 32GB RAM on a PC. I have yet to see more that 35% usage DRAM usage of 32GB while running PS. Will have to benchmark LR...

| Reply
Dec 26, 2019 18:45:17   #
TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC
 
gouldopfl wrote:
Intel has fallen far behind AMD. I've been on the computer business for over 35 years. Intel is stuck on 12nm and 14nm dies and they have not been able to get to 10nm. The smaller the die size the faster the CPU's are, the more cores and threads can be created. AMD is currently at 7nm, working on 7++ nm and are taking 5nm samples. AMD has surpassed Intel in desktops and is putting a hurt on Intel because Intel is months behind on inventory. Currently you can get an AMD with 16 cores and 32 threads and soon 32 cores and 64 threads.
Intel has fallen far behind AMD. I've been on the... (show quote)


I agree that AMD is on a roll, but the die size and number of cores isn’t the whole story. For the average user, whether more cores=more performance depends on (a) how many concurrent aps are running, and (b) how well the application can use multiple cores (parallelize the operations). Also, I note that the world’s two fastest supercomputers (Summit and Sierra) are both based on IBM Power 9 CPUs, which are 14 nm process.

| Reply
Page: <<prev 1 2 3
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2020 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.