Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: DxO speed issue  (Read 6619 times)
andyptak
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 240


« on: August 04, 2009, 02:10:08 PM »
ReplyReply

As much as I love Lightoom, I prefer to produce my DNG's in DxO. Now that I'm shooting with a 24mp camera, it is painfully slow in processing DNG's. Time to upgrade the old PC I think.

I know that Photoshop is a memory hog and I understand that Lightroom is processor intensive, anyone know where the bottleneck is with DxO?

I want to make sure I spec my new machine for best performance in all three apps. Thanks.
Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 657


WWW
« Reply #1 on: August 04, 2009, 06:07:05 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: andyptak
As much as I love Lightoom, I prefer to produce my DNG's in DxO. Now that I'm shooting with a 24mp camera, it is painfully slow in processing DNG's. Time to upgrade the old PC I think.

I know that Photoshop is a memory hog and I understand that Lightroom is processor intensive, anyone know where the bottleneck is with DxO?

I want to make sure I spec my new machine for best performance in all three apps. Thanks.

When you hit the process button in DxO, you'll see a progress bar for each picture/processor combo. In other words, if you have a quad core system, you'll see four pictures processing simultaneously, one for each of four pictures in your run, if you have that many selected. When one finishes, that processor will pick up a new pic, if you have more remaining to process. That suggests to me that you need as many processors as you can afford. And as much ram as you can afford as well.
Logged
robgo2
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 344


WWW
« Reply #2 on: August 10, 2009, 10:40:10 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote from: andyptak
As much as I love Lightoom, I prefer to produce my DNG's in DxO. Now that I'm shooting with a 24mp camera, it is painfully slow in processing DNG's. Time to upgrade the old PC I think.

I know that Photoshop is a memory hog and I understand that Lightroom is processor intensive, anyone know where the bottleneck is with DxO?

I want to make sure I spec my new machine for best performance in all three apps. Thanks.

I cannot answer your specific question regarding the choke point in DoP, but I always recommend getting the fastest, most powerful computer that you can afford, because even that will seem slow in the not too distant future.  That is just in the nature of technology.  DNG file size from a 24MP camera must be huge, so you will need lots of storage as well.  Make plans for multiple hard drives of large capacity for backup and long term storage.

You might consider posing your question on the DxO Forum.

http://forum.dxo.com/forumdisplay.php?f=7&...tl&langid=1

Rob  
Logged
williamrohr
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 105


WWW
« Reply #3 on: September 06, 2009, 12:25:36 PM »
ReplyReply

After I upgraded to a dual quad processor MAC and three fast drives in a striped array (RAID 0) ... set up as the scratch drive .... I no longer even think about DxO processing times as it flies through large batch files ... in fact individual files process faster than I can open them in Camera Raw.   Bill
Logged
Tom H.
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


« Reply #4 on: September 20, 2009, 11:31:55 PM »
ReplyReply

I am running DXO on a Quad Core (2.66 GHz) machine.
4 gigs of RAM, of which XP 32 bit sees about 3 gigs.
When I process I get two frames processing simultaniously.
Video card is 500 Megs.

Even at that it's SLOW!

This is a documetned gripe about DXO, they need to do better.

Do not be surprised if your upgrade path does not speed things up as much as you aare hoping for.
Logged
sean mills
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 22


« Reply #5 on: October 18, 2009, 12:05:28 AM »
ReplyReply

I have an 8 core system with 16GB of RAM, 15k RPMM SAS drives, and a 4GB video card.... DXO is just slow.
Great results, but slow!
Logged
NikosR
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 622


WWW
« Reply #6 on: October 18, 2009, 02:15:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Yes, DxO is slow. But one has to consider the processing it does. Having all the possible corrections active is very different than doing a basic conversion with things like geometry correction off.Also one has to be careful when he compares it with Lightroom since the processing philosophy is very different.
« Last Edit: October 18, 2009, 02:20:22 AM by NikosR » Logged

Nikos
Pages: [1]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad