What's your fastest set-up for running SPP?

I want to create a post about SPP performance at SigmaPhotoPro.com, but I have little information about what works and what doesn't. That would require quite a few Windoze machines and more Macs than I have access to, so can you please let me know what your computer, processor, OS, and configuration of performance preferences are, with an idea about how fast/slow processing a raw file is on your computer? Yes, that means you, if you're running SPP 6.7. If you're running an earlier version of SPP, please let me know what version. Here is the information I'd like to know about your system:

SPP version number

OS (whether you're running Windows or Mac OS, Mac OSX, or Linux, or something else)

OS version (It probably makes a difference if you're running a 32 bit or 64 bit OS.)

CPU (What processor is in your computer? I run SPP on a 2.8 GHz dual-core i5.)

RAM (How much RAM does your computer have? I run SPP 6.7 on a Mac Mini with 8 GB.)

GPU (What GPU does your computer have? The Mac Mini I use has an Intel Iris 1536 MB.)

In Preference Settings, under High Speed Mode (the third column) do you have the "Use extra memory to accelerate operation" checked? How about the "High-speed processing by pre-processing the image" and "GPU Acceleration" check boxes? A screen-capture of your Preference Settings window would be awesome! Like this:





I'd like to know if you're running an SSD too. For example, I work on an SSD, which is the main drive of the Mac Mini, but the raw files are on an external, portable USB 3 drive (a modern 4TB Western Digital drive). I usually save the files I'm exporting from the raw files to the SSD though, not that it seems to make any difference in the processing speed, when I save to the external drive instead. I don't have an external SSD to experiment with.

One more thing I'm interested in knowing is the speed of processing. For example, with my full-resolution SD Quattro H raw files it usually takes about 10 to 12 seconds for the Mac Mini that I use to save an image from the raw files, if I make a few adjustments. I've done batch tests that reflect a similar time of processing. Of course that changes with the background processing that's happening (i.e. if the Web browser is full of tabs, which are causing the computer to work hard, which might be slowing down SPP).

Here's a raw file from my SD Quattro H that everyone can use:


--
Scott Barton Kennelly
https://www.bigprintphotos.com/

Interesting Scott! I'll provide screenshots and exact details soon.

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Ryzen 1700 (not overclocked)

RAM 16 GB (forgot the frequency... but slow)

GPU AMD radeon 390

SSD Samsung 860 evo



Startup: 4 seconds
Opening a file: 11 sec
Zooming to 100%: 2.5 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: 2 sec
Saving: 8.5 sec

Hope that helps.

Best,

Dan

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Ryzen 3700X 8-core 3.6GHz

RAM 32 GB (3200MHz)

GPU nVidia Geforce 1650 (4GB)

SSD Samsung 970 EVO M.2 500GB

This time, I closed all my stuff running in the background. This mostly helped with starting SPP and opening the files.

Startup: 4-5 seconds
Opening a file: difficult to measure, around 2 sec
Zooming to 100%: difficult to measure, around 1 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: (near) instant, faster than my reaction time to start the stopwatch.
Saving to 16-bit TIFF: 3.5-4.5 sec

Settings:

PC - Notebook - MSI GP62MVR7RF

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Intel Core I7 7700 HQ @ 3.5 Ghz

RAM 32 GB (2666MHz)

GPU nVidia Geforce 1060 (3GB)

SSD1 Sabrent Rocket 1 TB NVME (3450 mb/s read, 3000 mb/s write) Used for SPP and OS
SSD2 Sandisk Pro 1 TB SATA (550 mb/s)

Startup: 5 seconds
Opening a file: 2-3 sec
Zooming to 100%: 1-2 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: near instant
Saving to JPG: 5 sec

I have rather old notebook on which I do everything, I know that it is weak, but before SPP 6.7 it was somehow usable, now it's much worse.

My system is:

Intel Pentium CPU N3540 2.16GHz, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD, Intel HD 400 integrated graphics

Windows 8.1 64-bit

I enabled all the speed settings in SPP like "use extra memory", "use GPU" etc.

After that it became a bit faster with DNG images. At least now I can adjust image parameters and wait only 3-5 sec. But using the 1:1 loupe on the image or panning the 1:1 image still takes a very long time, like 20 seconds per each update.

I have no such problems in RAW Therapee, it's much faster.

DanInJapan256 said:

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Ryzen 1700 (not overclocked)

RAM 16 GB (forgot the frequency... but slow)

GPU AMD radeon 390

SSD Samsung 860 evo



Startup: 4 seconds
Opening a file: 11 sec
Zooming to 100%: 2.5 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: 2 sec
Saving: 8.5 sec

Hope that helps.

Best,

Dan

Click to expand...

Thanks Dan! Yes it helps a lot.



--
Scott Barton Kennelly

Sjak said:

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Ryzen 3700X 8-core 3.6GHz

RAM 32 GB (3200MHz)

GPU nVidia Geforce 1650 (4GB)

SSD Samsung 970 EVO M.2 500GB

This time, I closed all my stuff running in the background. This mostly helped with starting SPP and opening the files.

Startup: 4-5 seconds
Opening a file: difficult to measure, around 2 sec
Zooming to 100%: difficult to measure, around 1 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: (near) instant, faster than my reaction time to start the stopwatch.
Saving to 16-bit TIFF: 3.5-4.5 sec

Settings:

Click to expand...

Nice! Thank you! It looks like SPP is reaonably fast, now that computer systems are faster than they used to be, when people were complaining about how slow SPP was years ago. Of course I guess some of this speed has to do with SPP using the GPU in our computers now.



--
Scott Barton Kennelly

motionride said:

PC - Notebook - MSI GP62MVR7RF

SPP version 6.7

OS Windows 10 (64 bit)

CPU Intel Core I7 7700 HQ @ 3.5 Ghz

RAM 32 GB (2666MHz)

GPU nVidia Geforce 1060 (3GB)

SSD1 Sabrent Rocket 1 TB NVME (3450 mb/s read, 3000 mb/s write) Used for SPP and OS
SSD2 Sandisk Pro 1 TB SATA (550 mb/s)

Startup: 5 seconds
Opening a file: 2-3 sec
Zooming to 100%: 1-2 sec
Adjusting fill light +0.2: near instant
Saving to JPG: 5 sec

Click to expand...

Thank you Jan! I appreciate the data.

dr.noise said:

I have rather old notebook on which I do everything, I know that it is weak, but before SPP 6.7 it was somehow usable, now it's much worse.

My system is:

Intel Pentium CPU N3540 2.16GHz, 8GB RAM, 1TB HDD, Intel HD 400 integrated graphics

Windows 8.1 64-bit

I enabled all the speed settings in SPP like "use extra memory", "use GPU" etc.

After that it became a bit faster with DNG images. At least now I can adjust image parameters and wait only 3-5 sec. But using the 1:1 loupe on the image or panning the 1:1 image still takes a very long time, like 20 seconds per each update.

I have no such problems in RAW Therapee, it's much faster.

Click to expand...

Wow! I've seen it take a long time for some of the computers I've used for panning, but not with SPP (at least not for as long as I can remember). It does take quite a while for updates to take effect (i.e. when I change the white balance setting or Color Mode, the blue progress bar moves slowy across, as the image is updated, and that often takes as much as ten seconds or more). Your system might be slower than mine though. It seems a fast, new system is the key. I've been considering getting a Windows 10 Pro notebook, with a quad-core i7 processor and 16 GB of RAM. (That's four times the amount of RAM that I have in my MacBook Air.) They seem to be pretty affordable these days.

There is definitely a need for upgrade, but the key is still not the hardware, but well-written software. As I said above, Raw Therapee works very good, so why shouldn't SPP, and I'm talking about Bayer DNG images, not X3F.

If they will always write slow software, no hardware upgrades will help it, it will become slower and slower.

dr.noise said:

There is definitely a need for upgrade, but the key is still not the hardware, but well-written software. As I said above, Raw Therapee works very good, so why shouldn't SPP, and I'm talking about Bayer DNG images, not X3F.

If they will always write slow software, no hardware upgrades will help it, it will become slower and slower.

Click to expand...

I agree that good software is important, but Sigma seems to have improved SPP a lot over time, first by making it less buggy and adding features, and then accelerating it by adding GPU acceleration and other acceleration options (i.e. "Use extra memory to accelerate operation"). One thing I wish they hadn't done is make it not work with older operating systems. I can't abide software that absolutely requires a new OS or an OS upgrade or a hardware upgrade. For example, I know someone with an old 27" iMac, which has a quad-core i5 processor and 16 GB of RAM. Such a computer is a powerful system, but it can not be upgraded to a new OS than El Capitan. It's just not new enough, according to Apple. He is stuck with El Capitan, and consequently could not run SPP 6.7, even if he wanted to. That's really unacceptable, as far as I'm concerned. It's not like his computer is an obsolete system, like an old pre-Intel system with just 1 GB of RAM or something. Sure, lots of companies are doing this type of thing, requiring MacOS 10.11 or newer, Windows 7 or newer (won't run on Windows XP, for example), but some people just don't have the ability to upgrade their perfectly good hardware, and for a company like Sigma do stop supporting old software and hardware seems wrong. After-all, they are a company that makes value cameras and lenses, right? The type of people who buy such things are the same people who have old computers.

Then again, maybe Sigma just figures people can easily just buy a $400 computer with Windoze 10 on it, if they want to use a newer Sigma camera with the latest software . . . or they can buy a used MacBook Pro with High Sierra running on it for under $400.


Maybe I'll get myself one of those.

Scottelly said:

For example, I know someone with an old 27" iMac, which has a quad-core i5 processor and 16 GB of RAM. Such a computer is a powerful system, but it can not be upgraded to a new OS than El Capitan. It's just not new enough, according to Apple.

Click to expand...

This sounds like a business decision of Apple, plain and cheap planned obsolescence. Of course, if a company pulls this on you, it's normal to feel upset about it, especially since Apple-stuff is more a luxury-brand which sells at a premium.

SPP supports Windows 7, which is meanwhile a 10-year-old OS. I think it's difficult for Sigma to cover all the smaller OS in all older versions. Ideally, there'd be a Linux-version too, but considering the small user base at consumers, I can understand Sigma's decision to not develop.

Sjak said:

Scottelly said:

For example, I know someone with an old 27" iMac, which has a quad-core i5 processor and 16 GB of RAM. Such a computer is a powerful system, but it can not be upgraded to a new OS than El Capitan. It's just not new enough, according to Apple.

Click to expand...

This sounds like a business decision of Apple, plain and cheap planned obsolescence. Of course, if a company pulls this on you, it's normal to feel upset about it, especially since Apple-stuff is more a luxury-brand which sells at a premium.

SPP supports Windows 7, which is meanwhile a 10-year-old OS. I think it's difficult for Sigma to cover all the smaller OS in all older versions. Ideally, there'd be a Linux-version too, but considering the small user base at consumers, I can understand Sigma's decision to not develop.

Click to expand...

Well SPP 6.4 works fine on OSX 10.7.5, but the newer versions of SPP 6 don't. I think that's sad. I can understand them making enhancements that are only available in newer versions of the OS, but to make the program just not work in the older OS versions is not right, in my opinion. Maybe they think almost every Apple user just upgrades, so they don't need to worry about making SPP work with older Apples, but that's not the case. There are millions of old Apple computers out there that can not run the new versions of Mac OS. I had to upgrade the OS of the Mac Mini that I use with the big screen just to use SPP 6.7. That computer is only about five years old now, so it will run the latest OS, no doubt. I won't upgrade to Catalina though. It doesn't support some of the programs I would want to use, because it will only run 64 bit software and no 32 bit software (God knows why Apple would do such a thing - I'm hoping for an open-source solution to be offered some time soon, in the form of something like a 32 bit system emulator maybe).

Scottelly said:

Well SPP 6.4 works fine on OSX 10.7.5, but the newer versions of SPP 6 don't. I think that's sad. I can understand them making enhancements that are only available in newer versions of the OS, but to make the program just not work in the older OS versions is not right, in my opinion. Maybe they think almost every Apple user just upgrades, so they don't need to worry about making SPP work with older Apples, but that's not the case.

Click to expand...

Maybe Sigma doesn't have the resources to ensure compatibility with a wide range of OS-versions?

Regardless of the cause of this, I can imagine your frustration.

Scottelly said:

Sjak said:

Scottelly said:

For example, I know someone with an old 27" iMac, which has a quad-core i5 processor and 16 GB of RAM. Such a computer is a powerful system, but it can not be upgraded to a new OS than El Capitan. It's just not new enough, according to Apple.

Click to expand...

This sounds like a business decision of Apple, plain and cheap planned obsolescence. Of course, if a company pulls this on you, it's normal to feel upset about it, especially since Apple-stuff is more a luxury-brand which sells at a premium.

SPP supports Windows 7, which is meanwhile a 10-year-old OS. I think it's difficult for Sigma to cover all the smaller OS in all older versions. Ideally, there'd be a Linux-version too, but considering the small user base at consumers, I can understand Sigma's decision to not develop.

Click to expand...

Well SPP 6.4 works fine on OSX 10.7.5, but the newer versions of SPP 6 don't. I think that's sad. I can understand them making enhancements that are only available in newer versions of the OS, but to make the program just not work in the older OS versions is not right, in my opinion. Maybe they think almost every Apple user just upgrades, so they don't need to worry about making SPP work with older Apples, but that's not the case. There are millions of old Apple computers out there that can not run the new versions of Mac OS. I had to upgrade the OS of the Mac Mini that I use with the big screen just to use SPP 6.7. That computer is only about five years old now, so it will run the latest OS, no doubt. I won't upgrade to Catalina though. It doesn't support some of the programs I would want to use, because it will only run 64 bit software and no 32 bit software (God knows why Apple would do such a thing - I'm hoping for an open-source solution to be offered some time soon, in the form of something like a 32 bit system emulator maybe).

Click to expand...

There's a hack for anything.

Run latest MAC os on any mac instructions and files here:


run 32-bit apps:


run Windows 10 on android phone without rooting:

AWESOME! THANKS! I never even imagined doing that.

.. kind of amazing how much simpler it makes all the file management and processing options.

Throw the Sigma DNGs through Adobe DNG converter and the file size shrinks to about 50% without loosing any quality. Would shrink even more if you enable lossy compression in the DNG converter.

Shawn

Shawn67 said:

.. kind of amazing how much simpler it makes all the file management and processing options.

Throw the Sigma DNGs through Adobe DNG converter and the file size shrinks to about 50% without loosing any quality. Would shrink even more if you enable lossy compression in the DNG converter.

Shawn

Click to expand...

So does processing the DNG files in the Adobe program you use happen faster than processing the .x3f files in SPP?

Much faster. It processes the same number of files as you have cores. It takes only a couple of seconds to get through the batch of 4 in my case. I think the batches are quicker than just opening 1 file in SPP but will get some timings.

https://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/using/adobe-dng-converter.html

You can also do this directly in LR if you have the 'Recover Edges' plugin installed. Run that on the DNGs and it looks like it automatically compresses them too.

Shawn