Recommendations for a new photo editing computer (+ info on system performance)

[roelwillems]

So my take from this is that an M2.SSD PCI-E4 for system/cache and really fast RAM (3200 or above) should be optimal for the processing part.
For culling and loading lots of pictures you might need an M2.SSD PCI-E3 or PCI-E4 to speed it up.
Maybe a solution is to have new pictures on a M2.SSD and then move them to storage after first culling/processing?

From my testing and the information I read it is best to have LR and the cache on a fast disk (SSD but M.2 SSD would be best). The testing by Puget systems shows that this (and indeed fast ram up to 16 gb) does help performance.

For storing the originals I found only a very slight performance difference when using the regular HDD (72.000 rpm) vs the M.2 SSD (did a test with a catalog of 27k images)
It is a bit of an edge case but when you have a fairly large catalog and you scroll directly from first to the final image (no 1-1 previews generated) some previews take a fraction longer to appear when all originals are on the HDD vs all on the M.2 SSD. So there is a slight effect on browsing images. But in daily use, this isn't noticeable at all (and when you have a large collection of images not worth the additional expense IMHO).

When editing it doesn't seem to matter for LR where the originals are stored. But it would be interesting to test your strategy for import/culling. So doing the import, culling (and processing, as it's not hurting performance either) on a faster disk and then moving it over to long term storage on the slower disk.

I will test a large import tomorrow or the day after and report back!

 

[davidzvi]

May I guess that the drives above are:
Upper left M2.SSD PCI-E3
Upper Right SATA SSD
Lower Left HDD 5400 RPM
Lower Right HDD 7200 RPM
......

Well the top two are easy. 1 out of 2 on the bottom.

Drive on the bottom left:
WD Se WD2000F9YZ 2TB 7200 RPM 64MB Cache SATA 6.0Gb/s 3.5" Enterprise Hard Drive
I had a pair of these in a RAID 1 configuration through the end of 2018 while I was still actively working on client images. Once I was done with that I separated them and broke the array, I don't need that overhead anymore. A step up from the original WD Reds, but not quite the WD RE drives, kind of like the Red Pros (7200 rpm, 5 yr warranty, ...; but they weren't out when I bought these.)

Drive on the Bottom right:
HGST 10TB Deskstar 7200 rpm 256MB Cache SATA III 3.5" Internal NAS Drive Kit
Mass storage for images, videos, music, etc

 

[roelwillems]

Small but nice update regarding LR Classic CC (9.2) for anyone looking at a new editing system:

GPU Accelerated Editing for Lens Correction and Transform

Expanding on our GPU support, we have added full GPU acceleration for Lens Correction and Transform adjustments.

Shows that Adobe is pushing more editing tasks to the GPU vs relying on CPU.

 

[roelwillems]

When editing it doesn't seem to matter for LR where the originals are stored. But it would be interesting to test your strategy for import/culling. So doing the import, culling (and processing, as it's not hurting performance either) on a faster disk and then moving it over to long term storage on the slower disk.

I will test a large import tomorrow or the day after and report back!

Quick update (I'm not completely done testing) but my preliminary results show that it does help when you browse the catalog when the original images are stored on a fast disk.

It seems that LR (unknowingly to me) had generated previews on the 27k catalog. Turning the previews off definitely introduces noticeable lag in generating the small previews in the library (browsing the total catalog).

I am comparing a 7200 RPM HDD (160mb/s) vs M.2 SSD (3480 mb/s). And there is definitely a difference in performance browsing images. In my opinion it still isn't worth the investment in M.2 SSD's when you need to store terabytes of images. But it does supports @BosseBe suggestion. Using a fast SSD for the catalog, cache and original files you are currently working on (moving them to the HDD when you are done).
Another option is to generate previews (which are stored on the faster disk) but I don't expect this to be faster than having the originals on the faster disk for culling and processing.

I don't know how much difference a regular SSD would make compared to the spinning disk and M.2 SSD (could be a more price conscious option vs M.2 or upgrade over a spinning disk for long term storage).

Deleting the previews didn't impact editing (having the originals on the slower HDD). So having the originals on a spinning disk seems only to impacting the rendering of the small library view previews (and I expect importing).

I want to check two additional scenarios, smaller ~1k catalog originals on spinning disk vs M.2 SSD and import speed via LR onto spinning disk vs M.2 SSD.

 

[wyk]

Less cpu or even RAM I could live with. No way could I ever go back to a disc.

 

[Robert Davidson]

I'm still using a late 2013 iMac 27". So would recommend an iMac!

 

[John King]

My computer MB and CPU is about 10 y.o (3.8 GHz Core2 Duo), but with an SSD, fast enterprise class HDDs with big caches and 16 GB RAM, it is fast enough for my purposes. Running Windows 7 Pro 64. I run Adobe PSCC and Bridge on it, and about 30+ tabs open at any one time in Firefox ... That last bit kills the memory!

Donated to me by a client, I had specified and installed these PCs in 2010. I upgraded the RAM from 4GB to 16GB, added the SSD and better, faster HDDs, using the original 500 GB HDD as a Windows Image backup drive - useful.

Added a 2GB video card and a Dell 100% aRGB 25" monitor (UP2516D) and a 4 port USB3 card, and it works just fine.

There are i5 CPUs and i5 CPUs. the second to top tier are fast and good, the lower tier ones are slower than my Core2Duo!

For a new PC, I would recommend a reasonably up market i7 CPU, 32 GB fast RAM, a good quality SSD (I used Kingston ones when I upgraded the old boxes, but not their cheaper ones. Paid for the ones with the patented Seagate write sparing system). The HDDs should be enterprise level drives, with 64MB or bigger caches. The cache size really makes a difference - more than even the RPM speed. My main workstation has 8 TBs of internal spinning drives, with another 6 as external backups. My images (documents, etc) are also backed up onto portable HDDs, and I normally carry one of these in the front of my camera case - i.e. with me all the time, not left in the house, unless somewhere very secure. At least 4GB RAM on the video card. 100% aRGB monitor. I find that the 24-25" monitors are as large as I feel comfortable with, but others obviously want (much) larger.

HTH.

 

[wyk]

I'd like to think so, but many algorithms don't lend themselves well to parallel processing. GPU acceleration may be more of a performance gain than parallelization in a lot of cases.

With my NVIDIA card engaged, processing time for merges and such more than halves.

 

[pake]

I had an i5 with 32GB DDR3 and an oldish Radeon card & SATAIII SSDs. I spent a grand on my upgrade. i5 was replaced by a Ryzen 7 3700, the Radeon card by a Nvidia GTX1050 and the OS SSD by a superfast NVMe SSD. I also doubled the ram to 64GB and installed Win10 instead of the old Win7.

Guess what. The speed gains were minimal! Lightroom was barely affected. The zooming in/out was still sluggish (until I changed the previews to 1:1 but that eats HD space more). If I do lots of local adjustments, that image gets slooow to process. And what is the most annoying/disappointing thing is that my completely silent PC isn't silent anymore. The Ryzen cpu heats up in seconds! Even though I have a huuuuge heatsink and a quality fan the CPU temp rises to over 80 degrees (Celsius) while importing the files (with 1:1 previews) and the noise it makes is irritating. I've already tried two heatsinks, pastes & fans. I've also undervolted the cores. Nothing seems to help.

In my honest opinion, I wasted $1000 in my chase for more responsive Lightroom. At least the video encoding has gotten way faster but I only edit videos a couple of times a year so... Not worth the money.

 

[wyk]

Èveryone I know swears by these coolers: https://www.userbenchmark.com/Deepcool-GAMMAXX-400/Rating/4063
Also, ya guys might want to try their benchmark program. It's small and you can compare it to other systems just like yours on line to see if you can tweak yours.

I just use an I-7 ZBook, 24 gigs of RAM, an old quadro 4K card, and a couple of Samsung SSD's.
My version of LR isn't new enough to run the benchmark the OP posted.

 

[pake]

Èveryone I know swears by these coolers: https://www.userbenchmark.com/Deepcool-GAMMAXX-400/Rating/4063
Also, ya guys might want to try their benchmark program. It's small and you can compare it to other systems just like yours on line to see if you can tweak yours.

I just use an I-7 ZBook, 24 gigs of RAM, an old quadro 4K card, and a couple of Samsung SSD's.
My version of LR isn't new enough to run the benchmark the OP posted.

The first cooler I tested on my new setup is the Gammaxx 300.

 

[BosseBe]

The first cooler I tested on my new setup is the Gammaxx 300.

When I started to look into building anew PC with a Ryzen cpu I looked at Noctua NH-U12A for cooling. A bit pricey but capable from what I read.

 

[pake]

When I started to look into building anew PC with a Ryzen cpu I looked at Noctua NH-U12A for cooling. A bit pricey but capable from what I read.

The one I'm now using is in fact a Noctua. I can't remember the model though.

 

[davidzvi]

I'm running a little (by comparison) Noctua NH-U9S, no issues here. But I'm running an i5-8600k system and not Ryzen. One of my kids (well I guess not really a kids at 23) is looking at a Ryzen for a gaming system. I hope he doesn't run into this with gaming.

 

[ac12]

I recommend a 2nd monitor for other than photos.
My issue is that a calibrated monitor is too BRIGHT for "normal" use, for me.
A photo has relatively little white (and LOTS of other colors), but many web pages and software (such as Word and Excel) have a LOT of white.
Looking at the white screen makes me feel like I am looking at a light bulb, and my eyes get tired fast.
As a result, I turned down the brightness of my monitor to a level where looking at the white screen in programs such as Word and Excel was tolerable. Then I calibrate the monitor at that reduced brightness.
The old orange on black screens were MUCH easier on the eyes.

I wish monitors would have a switch like I had on an old Sony CRT: normal and bright.
There I could calibrate the "bright" setting, and use the dimmer "normal" setting for non-photo work.

 

[SojiOkita]

First thing I do with a monitor is to lower the brightness, especially for photos.
If my monitor is too bright, outputs can be deceptive (especially prints).
I find 100 cd/m2 to be a pretty good value.

 

[mcasan]

Built a new machine with the intent of doing an OpenCore Hackentosh. Ended up running Linux Mint OS and using Linux photo apps such as Darktable, Raw Therapee, and GIMP.

CPU: Ryzen 3900x
Memory: 32GB GSKills 3600
GPU: Radeon 5700
Boot drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 4 2TB
/home drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 3 2TB
/home/.../Pictures drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 3 2TB
backup drive: HGST HDD 8TB
Monitor: Dell UP-3216Q (used from ebay)

 

[Darmok N Jalad]

Built a new machine with the intent of doing an OpenCore Hackentosh. Ended up running Linux Mint OS and using Linux photo apps such as Darktable, Raw Therapee, and GIMP.

CPU: Ryzen 3900x
Memory: 32GB GSKills 3600
GPU: Radeon 5700
Boot drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 4 2TB
/home drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 3 2TB
/home/.../Pictures drive: Sabrent Rocket Gen 3 2TB
backup drive: HGST HDD 8TB
Monitor: Dell UP-3216Q (used from ebay)

Hopefully that 5700 doesn’t give you fits. I noticed in Windows it messed up noise reduction filters in Darktable versus the RX 570 it replaced. Maybe it will play nicer in Linux Mint. Should be more than fast enough though!

 

[doady]

My 11 year old Phenom II 945 X4 machine doesn't boot into Windows half the time now (just a black screen with a flashing white underscore) so I've been thinking of replacing it was a new one:

AMD Ryzen 5 3400G - $199 CAD
ASRock B450M Pro4-F - $120
Team T-Force Dark Z Gray 2x8GB DDR4 3200MHz CL16 - $85
Kingston A2000 250GB NVMe M.2 - $55
WD Black 1TB HDD - $95 (-5)
Corsair CX450M 450W Modular - $85
Cooler Master MasterBox NR400 Micro-ATX - $88
Microsoft Windows 10 Home 64-Bit English OEM DVD - $150 (-10)
Total - $877 CAD

Should be 2-3 times faster on the CPU side, and around the same on the GPU side (currently Sapphire 7850 1GB), but with 65W TDP instead of 255W TDP total. Reduced fan noise will be nice, and reduced power consumption could also offset some of the cost. I don't play AAA games anyways (because only indie games are worth playing on PC these days), so I'm not worried about that. I do wonder about Capture One Pro 20 though. And if I ever start recording video for E-M1 mk2, video editing could become an issue as well.

I will reuse the current DVD writer, because I am not throwing away all my old games, but kinda hard to find mATX case with a drive slot. It will be nice to finally have an mATX build instead of full ATX so I keep looking, but the NR400 seems okay.

With my system failing, of course reliability is a concern. I've read good things about ASRock motherboards and not so good things about MSI, for example. I've also started to wonder about SSDs and apparently the most reliable are the ones with SLC NAND, then MLC, then TLC. My current WD Black 640GB HDD is still working after 11 years, so I expect nothing less from an SSD. It will be nice not only to finally have the OS on an SSD, but also have two drives working in tandem.

I will wait until Black Friday or Boxing Day for discounts. If the total price is below $800 then maybe I will build. It's disappointing the price of 3400G hasn't dropped. The prices of HDDs have actually increased in recent years too.

 

[BosseBe]

Is there a question in there somewhere?
This is what I am thinking of building to replace my 8 year old PC:

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X 3,6GHz Socket AM4 Box
Noctua NH-D15
ASUS ROG Strix X570-F Gaming - ATX / X570
Corsair Vengeance LPX Black DDR4 3200MHz 2x16GB (CMK32GX4M2B3200C16)
Samsung 980 Pro Series MZ-V8P1T0BW 1TB
ASUS RX 5500 XT 8GB Dual EVO OC
Seagate Barracuda Compute 4TB / 256MB / 5400 RPM / ST4000DM004
Toshiba P300 4TB (5400rpm / 128MB Cache / HDWD240UZSVA)
Fractal Design Define R6 / USB-C
Fractal Design Ion+ Nätaggregat / 80 PLUS Platinum / 560 Watt / Svart
Total about: $2200

This will last at least 8 years again I think.
The M2 drive is PCIe 4.0 so superfast, boot time will probably be single digit seconds I think.
This is also the reason for the 570 chipset.
The HDD's will be mirrored for a little extra security, that is also why it is 2 different manufacturers.