Graphics cards . . .

Ephemeris said:

I was writing a reply which sadly got lost.

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

Not sure if the link I shared has been viewed but it covers differences between not just desktops and laptops but also games consoles and even an Nvidia shield.

I had wondered if a laptop may be audibly quieter. So if I'm trying to do a bit of sneaky editing if I manage a half day work from home it won't deafen others when I'm in a teams call.

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

It was mentioned to me today that the laptop does come with a screen so if I move away from that I'd need another screen.

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

I did some more reading around other groups but still couldn't see any obvious direction as to what is best for LR. It isn't just the new NR tool which seems much slower than Topaz but the enlarging is pretty slow also. Maybe the difference between a good machine and one that happens to be more ideal for these Adobe tools is small. Lack of data is the problem.

Click to expand...

Austinian said:

Ephemeris said:

I was writing a reply which sadly got lost.

Click to expand...

I deleted several posts with political commentary, from several members including my original warning post--when a post is deleted, its replies go with it automatically

Click to expand...

Austinian said:

Austinian said:

Not sure if the link I shared has been viewed but it covers differences between not just desktops and laptops but also games consoles and even an Nvidia shield.

I had wondered if a laptop may be audibly quieter. So if I'm trying to do a bit of sneaky editing if I manage a half day work from home it won't deafen others when I'm in a teams call.

Click to expand...

A desktop can IMO be quieter for the same performance because it has room for a large, efficient CPU heat sink. Laptops are space-constrained in their cooling systems.

Click to expand...

Austinian said:

Austinian said:

It was mentioned to me today that the laptop does come with a screen so if I move away from that I'd need another screen.

Click to expand...

Yes.

Austinian said:

I did some more reading around other groups but still couldn't see any obvious direction as to what is best for LR. It isn't just the new NR tool which seems much slower than Topaz but the enlarging is pretty slow also. Maybe the difference between a good machine and one that happens to be more ideal for these Adobe tools is small. Lack of data is the problem.

Click to expand...

I will refrain from further comment on that, but others are welcome to continue as long as we stay somewhat on topic.

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

Austinian said:

Ephemeris said:

I was writing a reply which sadly got lost.

Click to expand...

I deleted several posts with political commentary, from several members including my original warning post--when a post is deleted, its replies go with it automatically

Click to expand...

Ah no worries. I think I rewrote it okay.

Ephemeris said:

Ephemeris said:

Not sure if the link I shared has been viewed but it covers differences between not just desktops and laptops but also games consoles and even an Nvidia shield.

I had wondered if a laptop may be audibly quieter. So if I'm trying to do a bit of sneaky editing if I manage a half day work from home it won't deafen others when I'm in a teams call.

Click to expand...

A desktop can IMO be quieter for the same performance because it has room for a large, efficient CPU heat sink. Laptops are space-constrained in their cooling systems.

Click to expand...

That's some good points. I do have a Dell tower for simulation which is in my work office. That come to think of it is quiet. I should check my office is noisy with people shouting at me

Ephemeris said:

Ephemeris said:

It was mentioned to me today that the laptop does come with a screen so if I move away from that I'd need another screen.

Click to expand...

Yes.

Ephemeris said:

I did some more reading around other groups but still couldn't see any obvious direction as to what is best for LR. It isn't just the new NR tool which seems much slower than Topaz but the enlarging is pretty slow also. Maybe the difference between a good machine and one that happens to be more ideal for these Adobe tools is small. Lack of data is the problem.

Click to expand...

I will refrain from further comment on that, but others are welcome to continue as long as we stay somewhat on topic.

Click to expand...

Understood. In the workstation dell machines they fit the A5000 (I think) is this relavant to us (image tools).

Looking at prices I think I'm in the 3060/3070 bracket anyway so I assume they are each relatively similar?

Anything special to avoid or look out for? (For a full size of this is rather than laptop).

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

I have to sleep briefly and then catch a flight so I beg forgiveness in advance if I do t reply super quickly.

Click to expand...

stateit said:

Nvidea 2060 strikes a good point with cost and performance. Currently around £175 used on eBay. I upgraded to a 12gb 3060 for using with Stable Diffusion, but for Photoshop, LR, Capture One the 6GB 2060 performs the same as the 3060 in real world perception.

Click to expand...

PMB said:

Batdude said:

For all these denoise enhance functions speed stuff we've been talking about, what should I be looking if I was to choose between the RTX3070 and the AMD RX6800? Personally with everything going up in cost, one of the first things I look at is electricity/power consumption Southern California Edison keeps jacking up prices and is going to get worse so I would like to stay below 300 watts hahaha!

No but seriously, which one would you pick and why? I have no clue and don't understand what ray tracing and cuda cores do, the bit rate, and which ones have more RAM bla bla bla all these stuff is really confusing to me I admit. What I would like to know is very simple, which one is the fastest and costs less.

Thanks.

Click to expand...

From the minimal words from Adobe's Eric Chan...

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified



I don't know the AMD products but the RTX 3070 has tensor cores. All my attempts at using ACR AI Noise Reduction and come in at sub 10 second runs.

Peter

Click to expand...

Austinian said:

BobKnDP said:

There are ARM-based Windows machines.

Click to expand...

Actually, that's a good idea. I'd forgotten about the ARM Dev Kit 2023 I used to have; it froze permanently inside the BIOS when I was trying to change the default boot drive. It was very low power usage. It was never meant for consumers, but it was basically a Surface Pro X without the keyboard and display.

Austinian said:

I think I'll bail on this thread. It appears that no one will ever supply the data you requested. (No shock there.)

Click to expand...

Ephemeris, what you might want is an ARM-based Windows PC like the Surface Pro X. There should be reviews available to tell you if it's suitable.

Click to expand...

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Jestertheclown said:

With regard to the AI noiseware that Adobe's just released.

I've come to the conclusion that my graphics card is definitely due for renewal.

I've currently got an NVIDIA GeForce GT 1030 which came, installed in the computer when I bought it.

It's served me well, albeit a little slowly in some circumstances but now this Adobe business is happening, I've concluded that it's finally got to go.

The question, therefore, is what do I replace it with?

I'll admit to knowing almost nothing about graphics cards but I do know that I'm not about to lay out hundreds on a fancy one if a more moderate one will do a good enough job.

Is there a sensibly priced middling card available, (a hundred pounds or so) armed with enough RAM to get the job done?

I don't need the task completed instantly; I don't know if the file size is relevant, although I suspect that it is. I'm using Z7 files which come out at about 60mb.or more, so if it takes a minute for each one, I'll be happy.

My question, therefore, is; can anyone suggest/recommend a card that'll do what I want please . . . ?

"It's good to be . . . . . . . . . Me!"

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Ephemeris said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Even with a pretty beefy desktop (top-of-the-line CPU and GPU), I'd expect the system to spend most of the time significantly below the maximum power consumption though.

It's during exporting images and constantly adjusting some parameters when the system may be maxed out, and in practice that's not the default while editing. Or at least in my personal usage I tweak something, consider briefly what to do next and then continue, while the system is essentially idle and drops to fairly minimal power consumption. And even while tweaking something specific, I'll often pause briefly to consider if I'm happy with the result so far.

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Ephemeris said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Even with a pretty beefy desktop (top-of-the-line CPU and GPU), I'd expect the system to spend most of the time significantly below the maximum power consumption though.

It's during exporting images and constantly adjusting some parameters when the system may be maxed out, and in practice that's not the default while editing. Or at least in my personal usage I tweak something, consider briefly what to do next and then continue, while the system is essentially idle and drops to fairly minimal power consumption. And even while tweaking something specific, I'll often pause briefly to consider if I'm happy with the result so far.

Click to expand...

Absolutely understand Mika. I have noticed in this thread people's idle power is pretty high, one was more than most of our laptops use flat out.

It's the usage during a batch of AI NR, and it's exports that's the bit I'm really discussing but that idle power (let's maybe include some emails as idle) looks like some machines use a lot more.

Data appears to be scarce aside the government document I referenced on typical usages.

Keeping the number of drives down to say 1, sticking with 32Gb instead of 64Gb of RAM are all potential areas that save power but I assume the majority of CPU and GPU.

The question started with replacing a laptop with something suitably fast for the NR tools we use. I don't use Adobes' becuase the laptop is too slow. That question looked at laptops and non laptops but it was noticed that where a laptop may have 5A max type C supply the tower had a 750W PSU (I don't know how much lower that gives out but let's assume 700W).

Click to expand...

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Even with a pretty beefy desktop (top-of-the-line CPU and GPU), I'd expect the system to spend most of the time significantly below the maximum power consumption though.

It's during exporting images and constantly adjusting some parameters when the system may be maxed out, and in practice that's not the default while editing. Or at least in my personal usage I tweak something, consider briefly what to do next and then continue, while the system is essentially idle and drops to fairly minimal power consumption. And even while tweaking something specific, I'll often pause briefly to consider if I'm happy with the result so far.

Click to expand...

Absolutely understand Mika. I have noticed in this thread people's idle power is pretty high, one was more than most of our laptops use flat out.

It's the usage during a batch of AI NR, and it's exports that's the bit I'm really discussing but that idle power (let's maybe include some emails as idle) looks like some machines use a lot more.

Data appears to be scarce aside the government document I referenced on typical usages.

Keeping the number of drives down to say 1, sticking with 32Gb instead of 64Gb of RAM are all potential areas that save power but I assume the majority of CPU and GPU.

The question started with replacing a laptop with something suitably fast for the NR tools we use. I don't use Adobes' becuase the laptop is too slow. That question looked at laptops and non laptops but it was noticed that where a laptop may have 5A max type C supply the tower had a 750W PSU (I don't know how much lower that gives out but let's assume 700W).

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, my 1st generation Ryzen and 1050 Ti GPU idle desktop power consumption (browser and a few applications like GIMP, Darktable etc open but doing nothing) is about 70-75 watts (my UPS reports the power consumption in 5W increments). In principle I'd expect newer CPU's to be slightly more power efficient while idle. For what I've looked about Nvidia's 4070 GPU it seems to consume slightly more power while idling vs. my current GPU, but the difference is fairly small (a few watts rather than dozens of watts).

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

We do have a surface pro but I think it has an i7 in it and an Iris. It's not much cop even for basic EM modelling but it is splendid to take to customers and show presentations on, pull some mind map in MiRO together and so on.

I didn't know there was an Arm version but I assume that's Qualcomms 8cx series. Doesn't that mean it had the Adreno for graphics? Do you really think that will process images through LR AI NR quickly?

Click to expand...

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Ephemeris said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Even with a pretty beefy desktop (top-of-the-line CPU and GPU), I'd expect the system to spend most of the time significantly below the maximum power consumption though.

It's during exporting images and constantly adjusting some parameters when the system may be maxed out, and in practice that's not the default while editing. Or at least in my personal usage I tweak something, consider briefly what to do next and then continue, while the system is essentially idle and drops to fairly minimal power consumption. And even while tweaking something specific, I'll often pause briefly to consider if I'm happy with the result so far.

Click to expand...

Absolutely understand Mika. I have noticed in this thread people's idle power is pretty high, one was more than most of our laptops use flat out.

It's the usage during a batch of AI NR, and it's exports that's the bit I'm really discussing but that idle power (let's maybe include some emails as idle) looks like some machines use a lot more.

Data appears to be scarce aside the government document I referenced on typical usages.

Keeping the number of drives down to say 1, sticking with 32Gb instead of 64Gb of RAM are all potential areas that save power but I assume the majority of CPU and GPU.

The question started with replacing a laptop with something suitably fast for the NR tools we use. I don't use Adobes' becuase the laptop is too slow. That question looked at laptops and non laptops but it was noticed that where a laptop may have 5A max type C supply the tower had a 750W PSU (I don't know how much lower that gives out but let's assume 700W).

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, my 1st generation Ryzen and 1050 Ti GPU idle desktop power consumption (browser and a few applications like GIMP, Darktable etc open but doing nothing) is about 70-75 watts (my UPS reports the power consumption in 5W increments). In principle I'd expect newer CPU's to be slightly more power efficient while idle. For what I've looked about Nvidia's 4070 GPU it seems to consume slightly more power while idling vs. my current GPU, but the difference is fairly small (a few watts rather than dozens of watts).

Click to expand...

Hey Mika. That's helpful.

The 4070 is probably a bit expensive for me at the moment, they look to be around £600 and upwards.

They read well of course.

I looked at these from Dell which have the 4070, one with an 18" screen. The one on the left is a type C charger one on the right is one of those specific to Dell. One on the right weighs over 4kg.

Not sure if this means it can keep running at a high workload longer, bigver, more fans and the like.

Click to expand...

Kaj E said:

Kaj E said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

I am also looking at a new laptop. I noticed to my disappointment that the new Dell XPS 17" has limited the power for the GPUs to 60 W, which is well below the RTX 4070 200W TDP. Does not look very good. Maybe that is typical for a non-professional laptop. I have an old Dell Precision 7730 (with a Quadro P3200), which needs to be replaced. The AI denoise in ACR on my 45mp 7Z files takes almost 2 min.

I am currently leaning towards at a new Precision 7780. Still need to check if Dell has limited the power of the GPUs.

Click to expand...

Kaj E said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

Mika Y. said:

Ephemeris said:

BobKnDP said:

Ephemeris said:

Kaj E said:

(snip)

Click to expand...

Well indeed I suspect that is what drives many people even if they want to claim they are green. More not wanting to spend the earned money.

Click to expand...

Maybe I'm profligate, but in my view, the electric bill for my PC usage is a minor fraction of my total living expenses.

They'll pry my corded mouse out of my cold, dead fingers.;-)

Click to expand...

Well my bill is manageable for my laptop but if it starts using 500W mean during processing then that fraction is a lot bigger and not insignificant.

Click to expand...

Even with a pretty beefy desktop (top-of-the-line CPU and GPU), I'd expect the system to spend most of the time significantly below the maximum power consumption though.

It's during exporting images and constantly adjusting some parameters when the system may be maxed out, and in practice that's not the default while editing. Or at least in my personal usage I tweak something, consider briefly what to do next and then continue, while the system is essentially idle and drops to fairly minimal power consumption. And even while tweaking something specific, I'll often pause briefly to consider if I'm happy with the result so far.

Click to expand...

Absolutely understand Mika. I have noticed in this thread people's idle power is pretty high, one was more than most of our laptops use flat out.

It's the usage during a batch of AI NR, and it's exports that's the bit I'm really discussing but that idle power (let's maybe include some emails as idle) looks like some machines use a lot more.

Data appears to be scarce aside the government document I referenced on typical usages.

Keeping the number of drives down to say 1, sticking with 32Gb instead of 64Gb of RAM are all potential areas that save power but I assume the majority of CPU and GPU.

The question started with replacing a laptop with something suitably fast for the NR tools we use. I don't use Adobes' becuase the laptop is too slow. That question looked at laptops and non laptops but it was noticed that where a laptop may have 5A max type C supply the tower had a 750W PSU (I don't know how much lower that gives out but let's assume 700W).

Click to expand...

For what it's worth, my 1st generation Ryzen and 1050 Ti GPU idle desktop power consumption (browser and a few applications like GIMP, Darktable etc open but doing nothing) is about 70-75 watts (my UPS reports the power consumption in 5W increments). In principle I'd expect newer CPU's to be slightly more power efficient while idle. For what I've looked about Nvidia's 4070 GPU it seems to consume slightly more power while idling vs. my current GPU, but the difference is fairly small (a few watts rather than dozens of watts).

Click to expand...

Hey Mika. That's helpful.

The 4070 is probably a bit expensive for me at the moment, they look to be around £600 and upwards.

They read well of course.

I looked at these from Dell which have the 4070, one with an 18" screen. The one on the left is a type C charger one on the right is one of those specific to Dell. One on the right weighs over 4kg.

Not sure if this means it can keep running at a high workload longer, bigver, more fans and the like.

Click to expand...

I am also looking at a new laptop. I noticed to my disappointment that the new Dell XPS 17" has limited the power for the GPUs to 60 W, which is well below the RTX 4070 200W TDP. Does not look very good. Maybe that is typical for a non-professional laptop. I have an old Dell Precision 7730 (with a Quadro P3200), which needs to be replaced. The AI denoise in ACR on my 45mp 7Z files takes almost 2 min.

I am currently leaning towards at a new Precision 7780. Still need to check if Dell has limited the power of the GPUs.

--
Kind regards
Kaj
http://www.pbase.com/kaj_e
WSSA member #13
It's about time we started to take photography seriously and treat it as a hobby.- Elliott Erwitt

Click to expand...

CBR1100XX said:

Holger Bargen said:

PMB said:

From the minimal words from Adobe's Eric Chan...

https://blog.adobe.com/en/publish/2023/04/18/denoise-demystified



I don't know the AMD products but the RTX 3070 has tensor cores. All my attempts at using ACR AI Noise Reduction and come in at sub 10 second runs.

Peter

Click to expand...

Usually, AI technology makes use of CUDA cores of NVIDIA cards. AMD has ROCm. I do not know if both technologies are compatible and which one is better.

Click to expand...

There's dedicated AI cores in NVIDIA (RTX) and Apple Silicon that speed it up a lot. Think of it like a hardware accelerating video encoder which with Intel iGPUs let's my Surface Pro 6 export a video at only half the speed of an RTX 3060Ti even though the general purpose GPU power is next to nothing compared to it.

Click to expand...

CBR1100XX said:

The one interesting thing about that blurb PMB wrote is that it doesn't mention specific support for Intel's AI cores in their ARC GPUs. Those in some ways are the most powerful for their price but this is where they run into issues with developers not optimizing for them and on the other end Intel's own drivers not always being that great.

Back to the OP I can say an RTX 3060Ti is enough for it. I'd wait a little bit since in the next few weeks the 4060Ti is likely coming out so it'll either be a better buy or push the 3060Ti cards lower.

The 3060 especially refurbished is getting to be a decent deal and the added VRAM could help long term usability though I can't say how much of a performance hit it'll have for Lightroom.

Click to expand...

Craig Gillette said:

I'd wonder about run time on battery alone with the most capable CPUs and GPUs.

Click to expand...