Graphics Card Replacement? (Page 2): One more note. If the only thing that has changed on your system in 5 years is the software program, the problem isn't in your system.

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

47greyfox wrote:

I use ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5 (release of today 13.5.1.7136) and have been plagued by slow rendering of raw files (most are about 24-26mb) ever since the initial bug infested version of 2019.5. My computer is a 5 yr old Dell XPS 8700 running a quad i7 processor with 16gb memory along with a NVIDIA GeForce GT 635 GPU. Other issues aside, I contacted ON1 tech support about the slow rendering and a couple other sluggage performance gripes. After a pretty lengthy discussion where the tech reported that he couldn't duplicate my problems, he suggested that my "older" computer's GPU was likely a contributor to the rendering issue. ON1 puts a lot of burden on the GPU, so he said and then suggested I consider upgrading the GPU. Even though he didn't offer any specific recommendations, he did say that a gaming GPU was not necessary, but that I look for a bus powered card (single fan?), relatively low (<85w nominally) power consumption from my 460w computer power supply, 4gb of onboard memory, and support for OpenGL 4.0 or higher. I have the room in the chassis for a double width card but it can't be any longer than about 7 1/2 inches. I don't game at all and would ideally, given the age of the computer, like to keep the cost under $200. Since the XPS 8700 is not a gaming machine, should I also be concerned about heat buildup within the chassis? I have quickly found myself wrapped around the "too many choices" axle. Adobe has a web page where they list cards they have tested but provide no information on results. I did run across an article on "punchtechnology.co.uk that listed a number of cards, a one that I've looked at that appears to meet the suggest criteria, namely the NVidia GTX 1050 4gb.
So.... cutting to the chase, I'm interested in opinions from UHH users that have faced a similar dilemma and what their course of action was, particularly if you upgraded the GPU. Or... since my desktop has a few years under its belt whether I should learn to live with the performance as is?

I use ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5 (release of today 13.5.... (show quote)

One more note.
If the only thing that has changed on your system in 5 years is the software program, the problem isn't in your system.

NCMtnMan Loc: N. Fork New River, Ashe Co., NC

I think your graphics adapter is probably ok. As others have noted, a SSD drive as your primary system drive will be a substantial performance boost for you. I have a system with similar specs to yours and was quite surprised when I went to a SSD.

chikid68 Loc: Tennesse USA

This might sound odd but I recommend that you upgrade the power supply.
While your system is within the minimum power specifications it is just barely sufficient and at five years old is probably not operating at the listed wattage which by the way is the maximum wattage produced by it not the running wattage.
I suggest a minimum of 650 Watts and up the ram when you can.

Peter571

If rendering pictures is the problem then the video card is inadequate for the job. Hard drives whether regular or SSD will not improve your rendering--they will affect the speed of loading of your programs and pictures. The NVIDIA gtx 1050 card is quite outdated and purchasing it will waste your money. The ON1 program is being updated all the time and will continue to demand more powerful video cards. Your power supply, 450 W, is on the low end and will not likely produce 450 W continuously--so it will limit the video card choice. Check out the NVIDIA GTX 1065 Ti card--it may serve your situation well. It can come in a single fan configuration (smaller size), 6 GB DDR6 memory, uses low power relative to other cards so it might be OK with your power supply and its based on the newest graphic structure--so its fast. Its price though not cheap is the best "bang for your buck". If you did get a new computer, it is very simple to move the video card into it--that would not be the case with the 1050 card.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Peter571 wrote:

Check out the NVIDIA GTX 1065 Ti card--it may serve your situation well.

Peter, are you sure about the card number? I've done some searching and don't see a 1065, 1650 yes, but not 1065?

Peter571

Sorry! The card number should be 1660 Ti.

47greyfox Loc: on the edge of the Colorado front range

Peter571 wrote:

Sorry! The card number should be 1660 Ti.

rcarol

Haydon wrote:

Your big bottleneck is your mechanical boot HD holding your applications and operating system. Look for a Sata SSD or if your board supports it a NVMe M2.

I completely disagree with those individuals that are placing the blame of slow performance on the HDD and are recommending SSDs as a solution. The HDDs are not the problem for the following reason. The software required to run a particular operation is loaded from the HDD to DRAM and is executed from the DRAM. It may take longer to load executables into DRAM from HDDs than from SSDs but once in DRAM they no longer play a part in the performance.

TriX Loc: Raleigh, NC

rcarol wrote:

I completely disagree with those individuals that are placing the blame of slow performance on the HDD and are recommending SSDs as a solution. The HDDs are not the problem for the following reason. The software required to run a particular operation is loaded from the HDD to DRAM and is executed from the DRAM. It may take longer to load executables into DRAM from HDDs than from SSDs but once in DRAM they no longer play a part in the performance.

That is not always the case. There is constant I/O to disk, either from the OS, the application or as scratch space. If you (and the OP) doubt that, monitor disk performance (in performance monitor) and note the disc access light while you’re processing and rendering an image. It would be great if we could execute every application from DRAM (or L1/L2 cache), but in the real world, most aps are I/O, not compute bound.

AirWalter Loc: Tipp City, Ohio

47greyfox wrote:

I use ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5 (release of today 13.5.1.7136) and have been plagued by slow rendering of raw files (most are about 24-26mb) ever since the initial bug infested version of 2019.5. My computer is a 5 yr old Dell XPS 8700 running a quad i7 processor with 16gb memory along with a NVIDIA GeForce GT 635 GPU. Other issues aside, I contacted ON1 tech support about the slow rendering and a couple other sluggage performance gripes. After a pretty lengthy discussion where the tech reported that he couldn't duplicate my problems, he suggested that my "older" computer's GPU was likely a contributor to the rendering issue. ON1 puts a lot of burden on the GPU, so he said and then suggested I consider upgrading the GPU. Even though he didn't offer any specific recommendations, he did say that a gaming GPU was not necessary, but that I look for a bus powered card (single fan?), relatively low (<85w nominally) power consumption from my 460w computer power supply, 4gb of onboard memory, and support for OpenGL 4.0 or higher. I have the room in the chassis for a double width card but it can't be any longer than about 7 1/2 inches. I don't game at all and would ideally, given the age of the computer, like to keep the cost under $200. Since the XPS 8700 is not a gaming machine, should I also be concerned about heat buildup within the chassis? I have quickly found myself wrapped around the "too many choices" axle. Adobe has a web page where they list cards they have tested but provide no information on results. I did run across an article on "punchtechnology.co.uk that listed a number of cards, a one that I've looked at that appears to meet the suggest criteria, namely the NVidia GTX 1050 4gb.
So.... cutting to the chase, I'm interested in opinions from UHH users that have faced a similar dilemma and what their course of action was, particularly if you upgraded the GPU. Or... since my desktop has a few years under its belt whether I should learn to live with the performance as is?

I use ON1 Photo Raw 2019.5 (release of today 13.5.... (show quote)

I would see if the new 1060Ti would work. From the reviews I have seen this card is very affordable and performs like a much more expensive card. If you decide on it make sure to get the Ti version.

rcarol

TriX wrote:

That is not always the case. There is constant I/O to disk, either from the OS, the application or as scratch space. If you (and the OP) doubt that, monitor disk performance (in performance monitor) and note the disc access light while you’re processing and rendering an image. It would be great if we could execute every application from DRAM (or L1/L2 cache), but in the real world, most aps are I/O, not compute bound.

When you say, "That is not always the case.", I agree.

Real Nikon Lover Loc: Simi Valley, CA

Haydon wrote:

Your big bottleneck is your mechanical boot HD holding your applications and operating system. Look for a Sata SSD or if your board supports it a NVMe M2.

Agree. I have an 8 year old Dell basically was same config as OP. I changed out to a SSD and double RAM to 32 and it made all the difference in the world in speed. I shoot a D850 and the RAW files are still sluggish in loading and actually have about a 1/2 second adjusting fine sharpness on my LG HD monitor. With the upgrades it improved the load about 90% but I am sure there is a strain on the OE graphics card which is where the bottleneck would occur. Great thread.

Dale Evans - Amaetur Loc: Baton Rouge, La

No easy answer to your question.
On top of photography, I also fly flight simulators which must process large files quickly, so this is a problem that I am familiar with.
I would not install anything less than a 970. Top end graphics cards are expensive which is the main reason I have not upgraded from my 970 card yet even though my machine has enough power to run them.
Graphic Ram is expensive and it is the main reason why the great cards cost so damn much. Do Not Buy A Card With Less Than 4GB Of Memory. I am saving for a 8GB card which can cost more than a new laptop.
Be sure to check out Amazon to get an overview of what's out there.

TonyReynolds Loc: Granville, OH

I agree with the SSD comments. I installed a Nvidia Quadro P5000 video card to replace the Geforce GT635 in my I7 16gb system and didn't see that big of a difference speed wise. I then installed this SSD and it was a night and day difference. https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1382499-REG/samsung_mz_76e1t0b_am_860_evo_1tb_internal.html

Rich1939 Loc: Pike County Penna.

Dale Evans - Amaetur wrote:

No easy answer to your question. br On top of phot... (show quote)

While I haven't been involved for many years I used to create and program instruments for flight simulation (quit when people would pirate my instruments, include them in aircraft and charge fans for the a/c with out so much as a thank you let alone a piece of the action ) There is a huge difference in graphics requirements for a flight simulation programs and photo processing. Flight sims have to deal with dynamic imaging while photo processing is static.
I routinely work with 200-300MB stitched images and my graphics card is a NVIDIA GeForce GT 430. with just 1 Gig of memory. The only time I experience a slow down is when I try to use PS' motion filter. But then every one seems to slow down with that.