Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: LR performances and SSD  (Read 803 times)
ario
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 131


« on: May 29, 2014, 12:38:45 PM »
ReplyReply

During the latest couple of years I have been using LR running the application and the catalogs from SSD's (internal on the MBP and external on the iMac), having the raw files stored on relatively slow conventional HD's. This configuration is less then optimal for me in view of the fact that I frequently move from one station to an other and therefore I have to relink the raw files at every move.
Considering to go back to the arrangement I used in the past with the catalog and the raw files stored on the same portable HD (2Tb is at the moment more than sufficient for me) I made some comparison test and my feeling is that there is no appreciable slowdown.
In particular the (1-2 s) delay I observe when browsing among files having development corrections is basically the same, no matter if the catalog is located on the SSD or on the slower HD.
Do I miss something?
Thanks in advance.
Logged
Misirlou
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 668


WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 29, 2014, 04:22:31 PM »
ReplyReply

That's my experience as well. I've also compared USB3 drives to eSATA, and not found a decisive speed difference.
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2228



WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 29, 2014, 05:03:25 PM »
ReplyReply

I run the catalog, previews and all currently editing projects on SSD.  When the project is complete they are moved to the main image HDD to free up SSD space.  I see a huge difference having everything SSD, but it has to be all or nothing.  Any of the three stuck on a HDD will bottleneck quickly.
Logged

davidedric
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 43


« Reply #3 on: May 29, 2014, 06:09:17 PM »
ReplyReply

I have recent moved my image files from an ssd to a hd for space reasons,  leaving the catalogue on the ssd (I only have around 10,000 images).    My idea was to see how the performance was before deciding whether to buy an additional large ssd.   I honestly haven't been able to  see any degradation, for regular single image work.   Dave
Logged
FranciscoDisilvestro
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 571


WWW
« Reply #4 on: May 30, 2014, 03:30:10 AM »
ReplyReply

I expect future versions of LR to have the option to load the catalog, previews and cache in memory (RAM).
Current OS support already up to 512 GB RAM and configurations with 128 GB RAM are not rare
Logged

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

Ad
Ad
Ad