Photoshop CS4 is a disaster

I just got a new PC to work and finally decicded to upgrade my CS2 to CS4. I'm experiencing serious performance issues with the new Photoshop CS4, it's just very laggy.

Examples:

- Panning layouts is jerky, I have disabled flick panning.

- Sometimes browsing the layers menu, I click some layer and it takes a while when it actually selects it, changing visibility between different layersets also takes very long to actually refresh the new content to the screen.

- Font-tool: lets say I have webpage layout open and I change some text, I'm a fast writer and I can actually type in a whole sentence before it appears on the screen.

- Rectangular marquee tool is also slow, when hold the button down and create as selection, the selection borders are a bit behind my mouse cursor.

- Moving layers and pretty much everything is just way slower than it was in CS2. I have tried changing cache level options and disabling/setting OpenGL support but with no luck.

My system setup:

Windows Vista Enterprise 64bit (fresh 3 days old install)
Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550 2.83Ghz
4GB DDR2 PC-5300
Ati Radeon HD 3600 / Catalyst 8.10
HD Seagate Barracuda 7200.10 SATA 3.0Gb (System disk)
HD Western Digital Raptor WD360ADFD (Photoshop scratch disk)

Everything else runs smooth like butter, only photoshop giving me lag issues.

I would appreciate any ideas on how to make it running faster, I'm barely able to work with such low performance :(

Chris, Photoshop may not use DirectX, but I and others on this forum have reported improvements to Photoshop performance by updating to the November 2008 DirectX drivers. Another user here claims that OpenGL in Windows functions as a wraparound to DirectX...whatever that means.

Phil your question has been answered in a number of other threads. Instead of reading them you choose to bury your comment in a completely unrelated thread.

Photoshop does not use DirectX, to my knowledge.
But DirectX and OpenGL might interfere, or DirectX might muck up the window drawing in XP.

Why have adobe stripped out the The Picture Package functions, Bridge CS4 is no substitute and light room 2 don't cut it either.
As a busy photographic studio Not having picture package is a reason NOT to go to CS4. The GUI issues are a side show compared to the throwing away the best auto production on the market. Adobe talk about cutting of your own Nose to Spite....? unless I'm missing something, it's good night CS4 you aint got what Photographers need

CS4 a disaster? No, I don't think so. It has its problems for sure and its really hard to figure all out in betatests because of the million different computers out there.
See my configuration: http://www.adobeforums.com/webx/.59b7022d/21 for example. I am really sure that this kind of configuration is not for the common standard user.
I have also some problems and I am very sure that this will be fixed if it is possible.
I'm also involed in producing software ( computer games ) and I know what I am talking about.
You can do a lot with betatests but not all. Even when now all the availible graphic cards are added.

I think CS4 is a huge step ahead and for me the first time buying the Extended Edition to get all the cool 3d tools.
Of course there are other programs which might be better for 3d editing such as Bodypaint but you know what...it would cost me a lot more.
But to interate that in our production line I'd have to put it between PS and my 3d application. Why should I complicate it?
Photoshop is the standard I need and when I can get an edition where I can paint my 3d models and get the flexibility to use all photoshop functions ( I don't thing Bodypaint has the same functionallity ) for some bucks ( Upgrade ) more and even can paint directly or use the textures which are also stored in the same psd that is amazing.
As my texture coordinates are usally correct when I start using PS in the texturing process I am a lot more flexible. No more searching for the right position or switching between the applications.

To sum it up. Yes there might be other programs which can do some tasks faster then PS but I think with the complete functionality PS is alone. And this kind of programs are designed for just that task. PS wants to do all.
So before blaming Adobe, give them some time and help them to fix upcoming issues. Bugsearching is always not very easy in software development.

Greethings from Germany,

Matthias

Adam,

I see that you're testing on a Geforce 8800 GT and are seeing lag problems, but can you also please test CS4 on an EVGA Geforce 8800 GTX in Vista 64 SP1?

That is the hardware I saw the brush lag and severe cloning/heal brush lag. Toggling layers seems to draw fairly slow, and color curve adjustments and sliders in general were terrible.

This was at 2560x1600 on a 30inch LCD.

Intel BadAxe 2 board, Intel Quadcore qx6700 extreme are the other components.

I`d like to ask Chris or Adam:
Does Photoshop actually use Direct X? In which way?

I just updated my DirectX with the November 2008 distributable. Previously I had the 9.0c update from April 2008. It definitely helped, but is still far from perfect.

Previously the brush and pencil tool lag was small but noticeable with these settings:

AllowOldGPUS_ON installed
Enable OpenGL
Disable all advanced features

ANY other setting (OpenGL disabled, or any advanced features enabled) resulted in tremendous lag

AFTER updating DirectX, AllowOldGPUS_ON still installed

With any of the following settings, the lag is less, drawing somehow seems smoother. When drawing very fast there is still recognizable lag.

Disable OpenGL

or

Enable OpenGL
Disable Advanced settings

or

Enable OpenGL
Enable Advanced Drawing

All of the above are okay, zero difference in lag. The greatest improvement is in dragging free-floating windows. They STILL stick before moving, but for less time.

If I go so far as to enable ANY other advanced settings, such as "Use for Display", the lag is noticeably worse.

Windows XP Pro SP3
nVidia Quadro FX 1500
latest nVidia drivers and nVidia control panel

Is there anything new from Adobe to report on this issue? It's driving me mad.

The fact that people with Vista 64 are having less problems may be due to a different implementation of DirectX.

Even Vista 32 has a new display driver model.