Since intro I've been seeing ~4min Denoise AI times using a Radeon RX580 GPU. I've been shooting a bunch of evening soccer games at high school stadiums, even only denoising a select set of images means 20-30min of waiting while processing. Thanks to those who'd provided info on Tensor cores earlier in the thread, but I've since upgraded to a RTX 4070. Denoising is now down to ~10sec!
When are you guys stopping the timer when testing that linked A7RIII file?
I did a test on my M1Max chip in my 16" MBP. I started timing when I hit the "Enhance" button and I stopped timing when the upper left status bar disappeared (even though it seemed it was finished a little before the bar disappeared).
I got ~39.5s for that file timing it that way. Seems slow.
arbitrage wrote:
When are you guys stopping the timer when testing that linked A7RIII file?
I did a test on my M1Max chip in my 16" MBP. I started timing when I hit the "Enhance" button and I stopped timing when the upper left status bar disappeared (even though it seemed it was finished a little before the bar disappeared).
I got ~39.5s for that file timing it that way. Seems slow.
Adobe has a weird lag; the file is available in LR long before that bar disappears. I stop timing when the file is visible and I can see it's been returned to LR. Heck, you can even select it then even if the bar is still showing it being imported or whatever that bar is supposed to show.
So timing on my M1 Max with the 24 Core GPU and 32GB RAM starting when I click Enhance and ending when the DNG shows up in the window (status bar lingers another 4s) is 35s.
My MBP with M1 Max, 24 GPU and 64 GB RAM takes ~38 secs on the same file.
My old i7 7800/64 GB desktop that I updated with an RTX 3060/12GB takes ~32 secs.
The LR Queen table has been updated with estimated and actual times and more GPUs. The RTX 3060 now shows 30 secs estimate 37 secs actual. (No Mac data .. correction below)
I came here expecting to find this thread. I just TODAY found out Lightroom introduced this feature and I'm blown away. For my non-professional use it is simply amazing. I photographed my son's boy scouts graduation ceremony yesterday and it was in an open park at night. I started shooting at ISO 8,000 and quickly ended up at 20,000 and 25,600. I was ready to deliver (free, no expectations, no pressure, but still) noisy images. But after applying the Denoise filter on most of the pictures, wowza. What a difference. And it only takes about 10-15 seconds per image running a 9 year old i7 3770 processor and a two (three?) year old RTX 2080 Super gpu. I for one i'm glad to pay the $10/month subscription to Adobe to get all these new AI powered features on Photoshop and now Lightroom.
jhapeman wrote:
Adobe has a weird lag; the file is available in LR long before that bar disappears. I stop timing when the file is visible and I can see it's been returned to LR. Heck, you can even select it then even if the bar is still showing it being imported or whatever that bar is supposed to show.
I think at the end it scratches its head to make sure it got it right.
mcbroomf wrote:
The LR Queen table has been updated with estimated and actual times and more GPUs. The RTX 3060 now shows 30 secs estimate 37 secs actual. (No Mac data .. correction below)
There was some posts that the estimated time will learn after a few runs, well that Sony file was the first I'd done after Canon R7/R6m2 files, so the times on my normal files are going to be less typically as they're smaller.
Looking at Adobe's site, they do specify one thing to look for... "Average Ops/Sec" above 2,000, which my old GTX1050Ti does slightly better than, but not by much. That is probably very old spec, but it's at least some criteria to go buy on picking a GPU, because a lot of sites use a 3D benchmark, which might be more of a video gaming benchmark and not as relevant for what we do
I never used LR, grew up on Photoshop and prefer my own organization methods... I mostly use ACR, then crop in Photoshop, and have the Topaz apps setup as plug-ins, so I can still work on them in RAW when I "open" them from ACR when done tweaking them there.
So, moving forward, looking at the links provided in this thread, and stuff from the "queen" forum, I am beginning to see a consensus around the RTX 3060 being a "best bang for the buck" category video card in the WinPC environment.
My question is this, some people are saying NOT to get the TI version of some cards, because some only come in an 8GB configuration, BUT when you look at the Passmark scrore of say a RTX3060 12GB vs/ RTX3060 Ti, 8GB the Ti version is 10,540 ops sec, where the straight RTX3060 is 8,985 ops sec. So, which would be better for Photoshop's AI tasks? An no, I don't really want to spend the extra on a 4070 Ti that lets have both the Ti and 12GB, heh heh. Or, do you have another suggestion that doesn't break the bank?
I don't pretend to know much about gaming as I don't play any, so I've not followed GPU specs much. No video editing either. But for Adobe Denoise Eric Chan has said that the AI uses Tensor cores in the Nvidia GPU, and while the Ti version has only 8GB RAM it has an additional 40 Tensor cores; 152 vs 112 for the RTX 3060. This may be where the additional performance is coming from. Unfortunately no-one has run the A7R3 file through the 3060 Ti to compare it to the 37 secs or we are getting from the 3060.
The 3080 vs 3080 Ti is 20/18 secs with 272/320 cores and the 4070 vs 4070Ti is also 20/18 with 184/240 cores (this from the link to Lightroom Queen). So little difference, ie performance is not scaling with # of cores.
PS The 40 series run at a higher clock speed than the 30 series, so that may contribute to similar Denoise times but with less cores.
mcbroomf wrote:
I don't pretend to know much about gaming as I don't play any, so I've not followed GPU specs much. No video editing either. But for Adobe Denoise Eric Chan has said that the AI uses Tensor cores in the Nvidia GPU, and while the Ti version has only 8GB RAM it has an additional 40 Tensor cores; 152 vs 112 for the RTX 3060. This may be where the additional performance is coming from. Unfortunately no-one has run the A7R3 file through the 3060 Ti to compare it to the 37 secs or we are getting from the 3060.
The 3080 vs 3080 Ti is 20/18 secs with 272/320 cores and the 4070 vs 4070Ti is also 20/18 with 184/240 cores (this from the link to Lightroom Queen). So little difference, ie performance is not scaling with # of cores.
PS The 40 series run at a higher clock speed than the 30 series, so that may contribute to similar Denoise times but with less cores....Show more →
Interesting. Thanks for the thoughts. Ya know, a year from now, the price difference between the 3060ti and 4070ti is going to look pretty stupid to me after processing a bunch of my A7RV files. Hmmm... I might need to rethink my original stance. I wish Adobe would put some better info out there. I did read one blurb in my travels, I wish I could remember where, maybe the Queen's blog... that Adobe couldn't fully use some aspects of the new GPU's because of errors, and were waiting on FW updates from the manufacturers to fix. Maybe that's old news and has already been dealt with, but if true, some major performance gains could be coming, making specific card choice not quite as finicky?
Eric
I decided to get the plain RTX 3060 knowing it might not be as good, but based on some times that were already coming in (ie in the 30+ second range) and were acceptable for the quantity of noisy images (keepers) that I shoot. This was good enough for me for my pretty aging system for a couple of years maybe until I upgrade the whole thing. My feeling is that AI software is only just getting it's legs and it's pointless trying to chase optimal performance with hardware as it may change significantly in 1 or 2 more revs. For example we have already heard that while Eric Chan said the AI uses the Neural cores on the Mac M chips, it turns out there is a problem on Apple's side that needs to be resolved so it's using GPU cores right now. If I switched to a Mac for my desktop I would not know whether to buy an M2 Studio (released today) with the lower or higher GPU cores (both have the same Neural cores).
So is Adobe AI Denoise as good if not better than the competition? I haven't tried it yet, but it seems there are drawbacks besides the slow performance on older hardware. I do like the idea of doing everything within the software rather than relying on plug-ins. I don't have the time to fine-tune the setting on each picture. Is there any consensus on what the setting should be to do all pictures regardless of ISO to ensure a decent result?
50 is not a bad place to start, but your camera/sensor, ISO and especially exposure (under) will have an effect on the number you'd prefer. I'd guess it won't take you long to decide on a good middle ground. If you batch then you can only use one setting in any case. When you run tests, zero out all the sliders in Detail and do the sharpening afterwards.
I prefer it to Topaz so far. Clear blue skies have less or no mottling and I see less artifacts near straight lines on citiscapes.
lsquare wrote:
So is Adobe AI Denoise as good if not better than the competition? I haven't tried it yet, but it seems there are drawbacks besides the slow performance on older hardware. I do like the idea of doing everything within the software rather than relying on plug-ins. I don't have the time to fine-tune the setting on each picture. Is there any consensus on what the setting should be to do all pictures regardless of ISO to ensure a decent result?
Here are few videos I found helpful but you have to test and judge for yourself. Many of the videos I've watched say sometimes 3rd party does better and sometimes Denoise, even across the same file. Consensus is if you have 3rd party use what is best for you. If you don't save your money.
From a personal standpoint Topaz Photo AI, DeNoise AI, Gigapixel and DXO PureRaw 2 are off my OS now. The only 3rd party left is Topaz Sharpen AI.
Adobe Denoise only removes noise and brings out lost detail (it does not make it up), it does not sharpen. Many videos show the result of Adobe Denoise but fall short of explaining sharpening back in LrC. You can now add more Texture, Sharpening and Detail to the files.
I like to zero everything out, even sharpening before sending a file it it.
