If your workflow includes other software packages (we have similar articles for Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop), you need to consider how the system will perform in those applications as well. The differents can be mor den 40% !!! Lightroom is hard to benchmark since the things that are easiest to test (importing, exporting, generating previews, etc.) AMD has said before that Threadripper wouldn't change socket, then they changes to TRX40 with the latest CPUs. Is there any chance you might add capture one to the software you benchmark in the future? However, the increase in core count comes with a fairly large MSRP price of $749. And as knowledgeable as we are about workflows, we are likely never to be as good as the people who are deep in these apps every day using them to make a living. We are still working on updating our Lightroom testing right now, so it may be a bit before we look at the new Ryzen CPUs in Lightroom. Historically many Adobe products have seemed to favor Intel processors. So it would be really exciting to compare the new CPUs to a Core i7-4700K or Core i7-7700K. In theory, this could translate to almost a 20% performance increase over the previous generation, although it will likely heavily depend on the application. Maybe once we are able to test the features that use the GPU a bit better, but for now, there is almost no chance our testing would show any difference. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. Or is it a problem with your benchmark?• NEF-Export: Intel 9960x is about the same as 3900x/3950x as expected. Our Lightroom Classic benchmark tests a wide range of tasks that are divided between "active" tasks (scrolling through images, brush lag, etc.) These results are then combined into an overall score to give you a general idea of how that specific configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. Should you choose the new Ryzen 9 3900X 12-core CPU or the Intel i9 9900K 8-core? Hier findet man auch einen AMD, nämlich den Ryzen 7 3700K mit 8 Kernen. When AMD released the first of their 3rd generation Ryzen processors back in July 2019, they were quickly established as the fastest processors for Adobe Lightroom Classic. Example for dragging the Noise Reduction Luminance slider, Fuji X-T1 RAW image: from almost real time to 3 seconds. We were close about a month ago, then we realized Lightroom 9.0 was going to launch during Adobe MAX so we held off. The Ryzen 7 3700X is the next step up from the Ryzen 5 3600X in terms of performance and price. Benchmark Analysis: AMD Ryzen 5000-series vs Intel 10th Gen. Are the AMD Ryzen 5000-series or Intel Core 10th Gen better for Lightroom Classic? Archived. Organize Lightroom Catalogs. At a glance then it would appear that all of the systems reviewed here are notably slower than that old 9900k test rig - which is clearly incorrect. Soon after launch, there should be an update that adds support for AGESA 1.1.0 which is supposed to increase the performance of each Ryzen CPU by another few percent. And that '100' benchmark was established with a 9900k system. AMD hasn't added any more cores to their new line of processors, but among other things, they are touting a 19% IPC (instructions per clock) improvement. Yep, you are right on the average thing, the only thing you missed was that we multiple the average by 10 because a bigger number means it is more important. We confirmed these results multiple times, and for whatever reason, Lightroom Classic simply doesn't like the 5950X at the moment. I'm having a blast editing 4K content in Premiere, but Lightroom? I'm sure the hardware itself has an impact as well. Is anyone out there using Lightroom with i9 or Ryzen CPUs? Please add the Quadro RTX 4000 to your GPU test. Frequency can be grabbed through WMI or through the command line, but timings would need an external application which we have tried to avoid doing since it makes cross-platform support much harder. If you were to compare AMD and Intel processors based on price alone, AMD is anywhere from 11% to 30% faster than Intel. 3. In our testing for RAM timings for example, we only saw around a 5% max difference between RAM speeds: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . It seems like Affinity Photo is in some Tasks much faster. As for the future, only the developers could tell you.4) No way to really know. One of the first things is to get our Lightroom Classic benchmark up for public download. We used to test 1:1 preview generation, but it wasn't something supported by the API so we had to drop it when we made the benchmark available for public download. 3950x: 19 min 30 sek Here both CPUs had 100% usage for the entire exporte, but despite having twice the core counts the 3950x was slower. What is also interesting is Affinity Photo as a serious alternativ in some workflows (not all) for Photoshop. At least today we have the option to get twice the performance for twice the money. It's more expensive, but you get more cores, threads, and headroom in games and software. We might do something for other apps that use the GPU more (Premiere Pro, After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, etc), but I doubt we will invest the time to test Lightroom Classic. When using nvidia FPS counter my rysen system peaks to 3-4fps while my intel system goes up to 20-30fps while regulating the sliders. How about a comparison between the fastest affordable Quadro (the RTX4000) and the GTX 2080 TI? So in general, it should be better overall to leave SMT on currently. And hold that thought on the upload thing - that is a project we are hoping to get to next year. In my opinion that is a shame for Intel, AMD and Adobe altogether and not a reason to hype anybody. In this article, we want to see whether the increase in core count (and price) is worth it for Adobe Lightroom Classic. A faster export is certainly welcome. 4-core CPUs are becoming hard to find (but not yet impossible), and I would certainly like to upgrade my computer to take advantage of the i9 or Ryzen power in all my … Screen resolution is easier, but it also more complicated than it sounds. There is almost no reason to use the X-series when the Core i9 10900K is both less expensive and faster, so the true performance lead with the AMD Ryzen 5000-series peaks out closer to only 20%. However, your testing (Messy Memory Speed Standards) showed an overall increase of 9% in Lightoom compared with the slower 2666Mhz memory. PC spec, X470 Aorus latest bios. That shouldn't happen though, since Lightroom likely won't ever use all your cores.3) I don't think there is an arbitrary limit like that. In order to see how each of these configurations performs in Lightroom Classic, we will be using our PugetBench for Lightroom Classic V0.92 benchmark and Lightroom Classic version 10.0. So, personally, I wouldn't worry too much about future socket compatibility, especially with DDR5, PCI-E Gen 5, and who knows what else that might be coming in the next several years. The recently launched AMD Ryzen 2nd generation processors are a significant step forward versus the first generation Ryzen and are now well worth considering. 9.1's biggest reduction was undo (Ctrl-Z), now with 9.2, applying the slider is as slow as undo. When configured (Preferences > Performance), Lightroom Classic can use a compatible graphics processor (also called a graphics card, video card, or GPU) to speed up tasks of displaying and adjusting images in the Develop module, the Library module's Grid view, Loupe view, and Filmstrip.Enhance Details is also accelerated by the GPU. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. Yep, it looks like performance has gotten worse for the active tasks we are testing since we first made the reference scores. You can apply those after you're done, as a batch. Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. Since this testing was completed, Premiere Pro 14.2 released with some huge GPU performance improvements. Could you make the benchmark downloadble to execute yourself? It may only be about 5% faster overall than the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X, but that still makes it solidly the fastest CPU we have ever tested for Lightroom Classic. Or does there exist a “political correctness” problem with Adobe? Ryzen 3000 series Lightroom performance? Could you do this, please?• In comparison today vs 6 years ago (in IT-Calender: When the dinosaurs still walked the earth): you have to pay twice as much for the CPU and twice as much for the motherboard, to get a 2-3 times faster export, but only about 35% more power in active tasks. So we would need to be able to detect what display the app is running on which I don't believe we can do very easily. If you are concerned about general Lightroom performance, the Intel Core i7 7700K is significantly faster for most tasks and only ~10% slower when exporting images. You already know it better!• Looking at the NEF numbers, there is really no reason to spend even a penny more for a 3950x instead of a 3900x (for Photoshop and Lightroom only). Can you confirm this?• Compared to your roundup on October 16, 2019, the NEF export of the 3900X is suddenly considerably slower - by 35%! Puget Systems Lightroom and Photoshop Benchmarks Before we tell photographers if AMD or Intel runs Lightroom and Photoshop better, it is important to know why it is Matt Bach from Puget Systems is so qualified to speak to the topic. When we can, we try to have many of the tests be similar, but we first and foremost want to measure the performance for "typical" workflows in each app separately. In other reviews, however, there are indications that the 3950x could do significantly better than the 3900x with SMT-off. The CPUs in the HP Z440 are almost 6 years old now, so that is what is going to be holding you back. However, since Intel is launching their new Core X-10000 series processors and AMD is launching their new 3rd Gen Threadripper processors in the near future, we are only going to compare the 3950X to a handful of Intel and AMD CPUs. Puget Systems Lightroom Classic Benchmark. A Quadro RTX4000 is going to perform about on par with a RTX 2060 Super or RTX 2070. I think above a small GPU upgrade, you are going to be bottlenecked by your CPU. I am stoked for the release of the Ryzen 5000 chips. That seems huge considering we only see 5-15% gains between CPU generations. 9.2 is at least 4 times slower than the last V8 release. 8.4)Overall Score: 1000Active Tasks Score: 100Passive Tasks Score: 100, I dont understand why if everything is normalized to 9900K, why the score for 9900K is not 1000 (100 active / 100 passive), Yeah, compare is really interesting.. It also gets a bit hairy for us since we are partners with many of these companies, and very few of them seem to welcome head-to-head comparisons. Interesting, that is a much larger difference than we have seen. At a recent event, Intel ran a comparison using Adobe Lightroom that showed better performance on a Tiger Lake i7-118G7 machine versus one equipped with a Ryzen 4800U. For the Crowd - The overall result of active and passive tasks are indicators. A few notes on the hardware and software used for our testing: First, we have decided to standardize on DDR4-2933 memory for the Ryzen platform. We are working on getting the benchmark up for download. Thanks for the reply. The difference shouldn't be more than 40% though. All of those can affect performance, and it looks like we have overall seen a performance drop of about 8% with the 9900K since that time. Benchmark. Even if we do out own testing on older platforms, nothing is ever going to be as accurate as comparing the performance of the exact system you are using today to whatever the latest hardware is. If there is a specific task that is a hindrance to your workflow, examining the raw results for that task is going to be much more applicable than the scores that our benchmark calculated. There are quite a few things we want to test in LrC, but unfortunately the API is way behind other apps like Photoshop and Premiere Pro. I recently upgraded from an Intel i5 2500K system to a AMD Ryzen 1800X-based machine. I see that the 'active score' benchmarks are all under 100. If you take results seriously, you must search for your workflow results in details. Why? Wanted to ask - will there be benchmarking series, where the new amd GPUs are used in tandem with the new CPUs and SAM on, i am curious weather there is any performance gain to be found outside of games. 2) The system shouldn't lock up, but if it does, you can always do some trickery with Windows affinity so that Lightroom isn't allowed to use a handful of CPU cores. I also see bad performance in Lightroom classic where I exported from ARW to JPG 397 files (the same files with the same edit on both systems) with quality set to 80 and got these times: 7820x: 16 min 21 sek. are often not what people are the most concerned about. If you are concerned about general Lightroom performance, the Intel Core i7 7700K is significantly faster for most tasks and only ~10% slower when exporting images. Either way you look at it, however, the 3950X further solidifies AMD's lead over Intel for Lightroom Classic. Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: *All the latest drivers, OS updates, BIOS, and firmware applied as of November 11th, 2019. Now, AMD is launching one more 3rd generation Ryzen CPU - the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X. I was wondering if you had performed any testing using this faster memory, and whether further big gains were achievable for a modest investment. i understood how you calculate the total score (Active + Passive)/2*10 .. :-), - There are no information about Screenresolution- There are no information about RAM CL-Timings. The only oddity in our testing was that the Ryzen 9 5950X ended up performing worse than the 5900X - in large part due to some performance issues with the "Build 500x Smart Previews" tests. With the launch of AMD's new Ryzen 5000-series processors, however, it is very likely that AMD will be able to take a very solid lead over Intel in Lightroom Classic no matter what task you are looking at. The Lightroom benchmark is a bit finicky at times since we have to do quite a bit of the testing via external scripts, and de-focusing the Lightroom window can make things break. From what your headaches are, the Threadripper 3960X is probably the way to go. It probably isn't just Lightroom though, Windows updates and drivers also have an impact on performance - and sometimes not in a good way. Be sure to check our list of Hardware Articles to keep up to date on how all of these software packages - and more - perform with the latest CPUs. On my system, for the Develop sliders (the only performance characteristic I care about as I spend 90+% of my Lightroom time dragging sliders), V9.1 was a slowdown and 9.2 a huge slowdown. Is this due to another "performance optimization" of Adobe? Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Why?• Video Card: Is it really meaningful to use a graphics card that would normally not be installed in a Lightroom computer (RTX 2080 Ti)? One thing we do want to note is that the pre-launch BIOS that is available for Ryzen motherboards is using AGESA 1.0.8. Right now our plate is pretty full, but that is pretty close to the top of my to-do list. it is very hard to know where you stand with performance on your current system. Is there a solution for the same Benchmark as Photoshop to validate both for example - new PS Action compared with new AP Macro? System Specs ----- Asus Pro X370 Prime (Bios 0515) Ryzen 1700x @ … HP Z440, 6-core Xeon, 64GB ECC RAM, Quadro K1200 4GB, five SSDs (dedicated Samsung 2TB 860 EVO on the PCIe bus for the library/catalog and 1 TB Samsung 840 EVO for the Preview Cache), two 4K monitors but Lightroom full screen on just one monitor. So far I'm using OCR to get everything in excel and compare things. Future software or BIOS updates could of course fix this issue, although we saw the same behavior between the Ryzen 9 3900X and 3950X, so this is unlikely to be a simple BIOS or software bug. Feel free to skip to the next section for our analysis of these results if you rather get a wider view of how each CPU performs in Lightroom Classic. Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic and that performance will vary widely in different applications. It is also worth noting that the 5800X and 5900X outperformed the 10900K not only in the passive tasks but the active ones as well, which was where Intel was previously maintaining a slight edge. Compared to the previous generation AMD Ryzen 3000-series CPUs, these new processors are all roughly 10% faster than the CPUs they are replacing. First things first: Thank you for the lightning fast testing of the new 3950X!However, it is very difficult to draw meaningful conclusions without a closer look at your numbers:• You seem to have tested Intel with HT-on. We actually just put a post up about why we are shifting to DDR4-3200 RAM on (most) of our systems: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . Since the 5600x isn't out yet, there's no testing to indicate if it's supposed faster single core speed will help improve performance in Lightroom over a CPU like the 3700x, which is around the same price but has 2 more cores/4 more threads. I haven't seen any benchmarks on the Ryzen CPUs, don't go by the hype, find some benchmarks. You are of course free to do whatever you want with your own system, but we've always taken the stance that reliability is more important than getting a bit more performance since in a production environment, system crashes and lost work costs far more money than losing a few percent performance. Granted, I’m importing thousands of RAW files at a time and exporting hundreds of JPG’s (the life of a family photographer on the beach). Feel free to skip to the next sections for our analysis of these results to get a wider view of how each configuration performs in Lightroom Classic. Maybe you should setup a databases system where people could upload their results to compare with others. great job again with yours online database, but! Its a strong alternative to lightroom and it has better performance, but I can´t seem to find how it responds to different hardwareGreat article BTW :D. Capture One is on our list, but it honestly will likely be at least a year or longer before we are able to take it on - we have a few other major project to take on first. Interestingly the Texture slider on the K1200 is real time, no measurable delay. I would believe that scaling goes way down after 6 cores though. Also, waiting for the LR benchmark. Why? Currently, we have articles for Photoshop, Premiere Pro, After Effects, DaVinci Resolve, and a number of other applications. Even if some processes are slower, exporting and building previews can be twice as fast. For me in my example, switching between Modules in Lightroom and scrolling in developer modul is very important, also 1:1 Rendering . Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. CL timings are really hard (impossible from what I have found so far) to get directly at the level we have access to through the various Adobe APIs. Even this relatively small 10% increase in performance allows the modest Ryzen 5 5600X to beat every single Intel processor we tested, although it only snuck by the Intel Core i9 10900K by a few percent. The export/smart preview performance drop is still present, but performance for everything else saw a pretty sizable increase in performance with Hyperthreading enabled. Might not be much if you are lucky, or it might result in numerous random bluescreens or application crashes. And since the August update it finally - 10627947 The i7 7700K is $50 cheaper than the AMD 1700X, and yet it outclasses the 1700X in both lightroom and photoshop (and web browing performance, etc): In fact, this is the speed we are planning on using in our Ryzen workstations once JDEC DDR4-2933 16GB sticks are available. Is the correct interpretation then that Lightroom has become ~13% slower between versions 8.4 and 10.0 in the 'active' test? I haven't tried exporting with SMT off, but I have turned off SMT when editing and it runs so much smoother. No, SMT (and HT on Intel) is on. 3) Adobe CLAIMS it only uses 6 cores, if that’s the case, do we expect them to start utilizing more cores in the future? Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. It will probably end up being a pretty big project since we are going to have to take into account how many displays are being used as well as the resolution for each display (since that apparently is a big factor for Lightroom GPU performance). The API is about as barebones as it could possibly be which makes it really difficult to get a benchmark created that isn't going to constantly break. That is definitely something I want to look at! I would guess maybe in 2-3 weeks we can have a version for Windows up for download. Lightroom: cache size 500GB catalogue size 5-6gb library 6tb Settings and library is identical. For a number of reasons which I won't go into here, there is a preference for Quadro cards. Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. I notice that you perform the Lightroom benchmarks with 3200Mhz CL22 memory. There is no need for that high-end of a GPU, but in the off chance that it does make an impact, we want to make sure that the performance is being primarily limited by the CPU rather than another component. How is the performance? In this article, we will be examining the performance of the new AMD Ryzen 5600X, 5800X, 5900X, and 5950X in Lightroom Classic compared to a range of CPUs including the Intel 10th Gen, Intel X-10000 Series, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, and the previous generation AMD Ryzen 3000-series processors. Turning off SMT can improve performance a bit in tasks like exporting, but in the last few versions of LrC, it also lowers performance in active tasks. I actually had been considering the 9900 prior to the 3900x, but the link in my OP is to some benchmarks specifically related to Lightroom performance, and the 3900x has about a 25-30% gains over the Intel counterparts. Definitely enough to skew results, which is why our own internal testing with locked down configurations is always going to be more reliable than publicly uploaded results. "Overall, Ryzen is unfortunately not a great choice for Lightroom. Lightroom Classic is not an easy application to directly benchmark, but we hope to have a publicly available version for download in the coming months. The K1200 is a pretty old GPU, so you should notice some difference with the newer versions of Lightroom Classic where they have been improving GPU acceleration support. Hence the attraction of a single slot card. High praise & recommendation for the current generation Ryzen CPUs. So, it is possible the work they are doing there is negatively affecting the tasks we can test, but LrC is still way better overall for the end users. There could be merit to using only the CPU for encoding, but while that was once de facto, the performance improvements a GPU can bring can make a huge difference. Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. Thanks for all the reviews you're making, there are really useful. This processor features a staggering 16 CPU cores which is really starting to blur the line between "consumer" and "HEDT" (High End Desktop) processors. Both missing informations are very important for the endresult. Benchmark. Comparison of 2700x and 3900X stock rendering 550 still photos. Comparing the 5600X to the more similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K, the 5600X is a decent 11% faster in our Lightroom Classic benchmark. Most important, however, is the performance leap in editing. Ryzen system is approximately 2x> less responsive. At the first look it seems like there can't be more than 5% but :-): RAMDual rank -> Single rank2 DIMM -> 4 DIMMDaisy Chain -> T-Topology2666 Mhz -> 3600Mhz -> 4400 MhzCL 19-19-19-19 -> CL-14-15-15AMD -> INTEL, Resolution1980 + 1020 -> 2560 x 1440 -> 3840 x 2160. If you want to see how it stacks up against a wider range of Intel and AMD processors, check back in the coming weeks for articles that will include the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, Intel Core 9th Gen, and Intel Core X-10000 series processors in a number of applications. AMD’s focus has been on offering higher core count processors v their Intel rivals but the performance per core of an AMD processor is still very slightly behind that of Intel. As always you guys do great work, thank you for the excellent write-ups and tests! Quite often I have to let my computer sit there over night while it churns out previews… I don’t want to do that. What took the Ryzen 3 3100 1,026 seconds to encode dropped to 200 seconds once a GPU was added in. We saw some odd performance issues with the Ryzen 9 5950X, but the Ryzen 7 5800X and Ryzen 9 5900X beat the Intel Core i9 10900K by a solid 14% and 21% respectively, while the Ryzen 5 5600X outperforms the similarly-priced Intel Core i5 10600K by a bit smaller 11%. So, the i9 with its faster speed and bvecause Lightroom is "intel optimized" (Dont kid yourself, Ligfhroom isnt optimized for anything) or the 50% more cores in a 3900x Display resolution I don't have an article to back it up (yet), but from what I've seen the difference is at most 5-10%. Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: *All the latest drivers, OS updates, BIOS, and firmware applied as of October 26, 2020. We've tried to work with the devs to add the functionality we need, but it can be hard to find time to add features that help us when they are busy tackling bugs and adding features that are useful for their end users. Putting a dual slot video card right next to the HP Z Turbo Drive would likely create heat issues as Hard Disk Sentinel says it's the hottest running drive in my machine. I will quote from your Lightroom benchmark procedure : How does the scoring work?The scoring system used in our benchmark is based on the performance relative to a reference system with the following specifications: Intel Core i9 9900K 8 CoreNVIDIA GeForce RTX 2080 8GB64GB of RAMSamsung 960 Pro 1TBWindows 10 (1903)Adobe Lighroom Classic CC 2019 (ver. Noch interessanter wird Platz 2! Thanks for the read! So for A7R3 42Mp .ARW files , is the 9900k better than 3900x ? I dont understand why the 9900K is not 1000. So my questions are: 1) given everything I’ve told you, which should I go with? Things have actually changed a bit regarding HT/SMT with Lightroom Classic V9.0 . I see, it's difficult and very interesting. I have played around with it a bit as well, and it looks like it is going to be really difficult to accurately and reliably benchmark. I really wouldn't advise going above 3200MHz though. Overall, the AMD Ryzen 9 3950X is currently the fastest CPU we have tested for Lightroom Classic, but the extra 5% performance over the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X for a 50% increase in cost is likely to be hard to justify for most users. Hey! Maybe in the future we will try to figure out reliable ways to check for all those things, but for now we are more concerned about making the benchmarks reliable and that they are testing everything we want. Puget Systems' testing of Lightroom seems to indicate that multiple cores (up to around 8) do seem to help with performance. The 8-core Xeon will fit but considering how much slower it is, not sure that would be an upgrade. AMD has had a strong lead in Lightroom Classic for passive tasks like exporting, but Intel managed to maintain a small advantage for active tasks like scrolling through images and switching between modules. And it's not always straightforward and faster and 100% utilized with more cores etc, as export is.Also it helps import previews and develop module when you make and apply a some preset with Sharpening and Noise Reduction set to 0. Is this right? I honestly don't know what specifically has caused that drop, but there have been a number of Intel security vulnerabilities that have been fixed at the expense of performance, and Lightroom Classic is adding more GPU acceleration which sometimes can reduce performance at first until they get it really dialed in. In Photoshop is “opening a file” or “filter results” for me very important, and on and on... Lightroom is sooo good and simultaneously sooo bad :-) I love and edit my files sometimes in Capture One too, but I found Lightroom for my organisational tasks a little bit better. The reason I ask is because there are many reports of Lightroom not performing well if the CPU has more than 4 physical cores. Posted on 2020-03-16 07:14:10. One of the reasons we sometimes used the Intel 10th Gen CPUs over Ryzen when the performance was similar was because only Intel platforms had passed our qualification process for Thunderbolt. Not sure there is anything meaningfully faster that will go into the current CPU socket. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. Think it's time to jump ship! So stay tuned on that! Der Intel Core i9-11900K kann den AMD Ryzen 9 5950X bei einem Gaming-Benchmark übertreffen 14.12.2020 Cydia, der "App Store für Jailbreaker", verklagt Apple wegen des App Store-Monopols 11.12.2020 Puget Systems offers a range of powerful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Can you please explain this? Takt und IPC zählen. The Quadro line is mostly about having high amounts of VRAM which almost never a problem for photography applications. Same with the new Ryzen - as far as I know, AMD hasn't made an official announcement, so no way to know for sure. Eine kleine Benchmark Orgie meines neuen Ryzen 2700er Computers. I have BIG catalogs- 30K to 100K images. We do have a couple of projects planned for 2020 that we hope will help things quite a bit for this however. I also know Puget Systems recommendations for RAM frequency but in the real world there are many out there with 3600 Mhz or more, see Puget systems database results :-) My working settings are moderate CL 16-18-18-38 2933 Mhz.