Rodolfo Paiz wrote:
For reference, my Win7 Home Premium is taking up about 38GB of space right now, but I haven't installed CS5. Oops. I'm trying to hunt down some of the bloat-reduction tips Monito mentioned, but haven't made that much progress yet.
From my notes I used to build my software installation (M is my second drive, my Data drive):
79. Disable (and remove or thwart) C:\hiberfil.sys by Start > All Programs > Accessories > Command Prompt - right click and select Run as Administrator. At the prompt type "powercfg /hibernate off".
80. Move C:\pagefile.sys (as big as RAM size) to M:\:
(a) Start > Computer > (right click) Properties > Advanced system settings > Advanced tab > Performance > Settings > Advanced > Virtual Memory > Change.
(b) Uncheck Automatically manage paging.
(c) Click M: and set System managed size button and click Set.
(d) Then click C: and set No paging file. It will move on the next Restart.
(e) Restart.
Oh hey, thanks. I prefer to keep the pagefile on the SSD (which is no problem because I have a 180GB), but the hibernation trick was one I couldn't figure out.
To sum up my discovery, Ram drives did not improve my performance at all. Further, despite having 32 gig of RAM, my memory gadget says I never used more than 4.5 gig even with some other processes running. It appears, to me, that LR performance is all about processor power provided, of course, there is no other serious weak link in your system such as really low RAM.
My point is not to dispute others performance improvements with Ram disks, but to say that the approach to improving performance may depend on where the weak link is in your system. I am concluding, based on my experiments with my older machine and now my upgraded super-duper one, that it is all about processor power. Comments?
I've seen more of a bottleneck at disk performance, Bruce. But the primary thing is to know your own system and find your own bottlenecks, as you're doing. That's the only surefire way to get objective results that you can then modify to get better ones.
went with a I5 2500K (not yet needed to over clock it) z68mobo 16gig ram and a crucial M4 128gb SSD.
had a few problems in the build (DOA mobo) so things took longer. while I was hanging around I used the SSD drive in my old machine and did a fresh install of windows and then installed LR4.0 on that.
well even without the performance gains of the other (then unused) parts I can say LR4 would have easily been usable. no real lag from it. so I can probably say that it would look like hard drive speed is the big importance when it comes to LR4.
I did it 2 ways.
1 : only drive present was the SSD . pretty dam quick .
2 : windows and LR4 installed on the SSD + LRcat & previews on the SSD. actual images on a 1Tb hard drive. = a little bit slower , with a perceptable lag. but still very usable.
Now I have the machine built everything is as fast as I could want
Thanx Ian, good information. I am putting an SSD on my next purchase list. I installed LR4 RC1 and now RC2 and now am getting slightly slower rendering speeds in Develop module. Adobe knew they had problems with LR4 and are rushing to improve the product with two release candidates (RC) so far. It looks like Adobe is robbing Peter to pay Paul with these release candidates as the sliders and everything works faster and better but now rendering in Develop is a tad slower. At least it is for me.
I may wait until the 256 or even the 500 GB prices fall some more.
Bruce. Ive not tried the rc's as yet on the new install, But on the previous system I did have rc1 installed. And I will say that for me at least it could almost have been called usable.
I did try a couple of things that I read may help .
The thing about not enabling all the moduals (lib, dev, book, print etc) seemed to help. (right click on them to get the option to select the ones you want) . Some say it will make no difference but I think it may have had a positive effect (maybe I was wishing it)
As for large ssd's . Well I will not argue that bigger will be nice . But I went with a 128 as the price seemed to be the best £ v gb.
I've told myself that no data will reside on that drive * (I clarify that in a minute) and that I will only install program's to it that it will make any real difference to. Which for me will be Lightroom and photoshop. In the future I will think about a couple of others like some video program etc.
Anything else will be installed to a separate 'program files ' drive.
I will also have 2 data only drives . 1 for images and video files . The other smaller one for other documents.
* now let me clarify the no data on the ssd. What I have done is allow my lrcat and the previews folder to be othe ssd. What I'm going to try and do is have a bit of room on there for imports of raw files. Then I can work on them from the ssd . And once work has been done I will move them over to the images data drive.
But I must say that for the few images I've played with so far I have not felt the need to have them resident on the ssd.
But I will try both ways .
Ian, you'll get further speed gains while the files are on the HDD if you switch off automatic update of .xmp data in Lr. That prevents Lr seeking and accessing the .xmp file every time you tweak an image and will save time especially in the Library module if the image is already in the preview cache.
Importing raw files to the SSD for initial work and review is a good idea and will boost your perception of speed. You still need to move them to the HDD and that takes time but it can be done while you have dinner or do something else and therefore won't take much of your time - just the computers time. The more frequently you open these files in the Develop module the more benefit you will get from having them on the SSD because Lr never relies on the preview cache for Develop operations.
I thought that Lightroom speed was dependant on the Graphics as it uses the CPU from the Graphics Card? Also that Windows page file only kicks in if there is no free memory available?
My two yr old iMac with 12 GB of ram has no problems with LR4...for what it is worth...and that is with CS5 alive in the background,
However...I don't multi batch if that makes a difference...I deal with the requirements of each image on an individual basis..then transfer it to CS5 to fine tune it......a great combo....
Ian.Dobinson wrote:
see I knew asking a gear question would cost me more money
I think my first purchase will be the 64gig SSD drive . which my current LR cat etc will reside on . I will keep the most current files on there as well while I work them and then they will go onto my normal drive.
then when I come to purchase the other stuff I think I may add another SSD for my windows .
My current system is clogged to the teeth with software I dont use . so I will do a clean install . win - LR - CS5 - Office. anything else will just have to install on a slower drive....Show more →
Ian
I got a 128G SSD on my last upgrade and, although not cheap, I wish I'd got a bigger one
Niall
nrferguson wrote:
Ian
I got a 128G SSD on my last upgrade and, although not cheap, I wish I'd got a bigger one
Niall
I went the 128gb route as well. I know a 256 would have been nice but the 256 version of the one I bought was £100 more.
Maybe in te future I will add it to the mix.
Bruce n Philly wrote:
So what does an SSD do for LR, all other things being equal?
can't find a source I read but not much tbh. Assuming your memory large enough, you aren't really hitting the drive that much. Not jsut an LR thing, this most apps. Give them enough ram and they are quite happy to do that read from disk, put into memory and write when done. Its not a read write intensive process intensive process relatively speaking (vice say intensive database operations).
My ssd experience generally has just been massive boosts to boot speeds. the windows tower and the mbp come up jsut like that damn near. this and the fact the mbp has less chance of drive failure since no platters only benefits I see. Laptops might get better thermal control as well. No moving parts less heat. Does seem to take more to get fans to kick on in my mbp. the tower runs a distributed computing project (folding at home)....she always goes full steam ahead so no affect there.
^^^
Well all I know is when I just put the ssd in my old system and did a fresh install of windows and LR4.0 . It was way more usable than my previous attempt at using LR4.0 and LR4.1 (RC)
