I changed nothing, so the speed difference is totally due to version 6 vs 5.
So, I guess the promised speed increase does not happen on all computers.
I hope I see a different story on my desktop at home when we get there in a few
weeks. It is an i7, 16GB RAM, 7200 RPM drive and a GPU.
Aram
Aram Langhans
(Semi) Retired Science Teacher
& Unemployed photographer
“The Human Genome Project has proved Darwin more right than Darwin himself
would ever have dared dream.” James D. Watson
From: leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:leicareflex-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Sonny Carter
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 9:38 PM
To: leicareflex@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [LRflex] Re: Lightroom 6 speed issue?
Just before LR cc came out, I changed out my hard drive on my Vaio ultrabook to
a Samsung SSD. It already had 8 gigs of ram and an i7 processor. Lightroom
flies on that setup, and it does pretty good on my work computer, similarly
equipped, but with a pair of 1 gig normal drives.
I upgraded my old Lenovo to an SSD too, and it improved LR as well, when I went
to CC, that machine sped up considerably.
I'd be interested to know if LR 6 is different speed wise from LR CC on the
same computer. I suspect it might be, as I had LR 5.(last upgrade)
from my iPad
Sonny Carter
On May 1, 2015, at 10:33 PM, Richard Ward <ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:ilovaussiesheps@xxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
I can't speak specifically to this version, but 4gig and no gpu and a laptop
hard drive really might be source of all the problems. I'm not an expert in
these matters but I would first look to laptop having 4gig ram, or the graphics
system possibly using chunk of your 4gigs, or the size of lightroom possibly
crowding the os and causing a lotta extra drive accesses. My working theory
would be you've got all of that going on with *bonus* lightroom attempting to
access the images on the drive at same time os is trying to swap virtual memory
stuff and the energy efficient (read slow) hard drive is bogging down.
Like with all theories I'll unhesitatingly toss it all aside in face of hard
data, experience, or expertize, but I think I'm on the right trail.
Richard Ward
________________________________
What would men be without women?
Scarce, sir, mighty scarce.
- Mark Twain
________________________________
On May 1, 2015, at 10:34 PM, Aram Langhans <leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:leica_r8@xxxxxxxxxxx> > wrote:
I upgraded to 6 the first day, but have not had time to use it much as that was
the day before we left on our trip home. We are about half way there
(Monterey, CA) and we have internet in our campground and power, so I have been
playing around. It is very slow compared with 5. Especially slow booting and
slow switching from library to develop. And it takes longer to import and
change from NEF to DNG. It use to do that in one process, but now it takes
two. Loads all the NEF files then does the conversion. Maybe there is a way
around that.
I am on my traveling HP laptop, an I-5 second generation, with 4 GB of RAM and
most of my hard drive empty. No GPU. I sure hope it is better on my desktop
when I finally get home. Just wondering if anyone else has seen any speed
differences. I know they said it was supposed to be noticeably faster since it
was all new 64 bit code. So far not impressed, at least about that. I have
played around with a few new features that will allow me to not go to Photoshop
as often. I like that idea. I use PS less and less and LR has added more and
more features since version 1.
Aram
Aram Langhans
(Semi) Retired Science Teacher
& Unemployed photographer
“The Human Genome Project has proved Darwin more right than Darwin himself
would ever have dared dream.” James D. Watson
