Skip to main content
Andreas Varro
Participant
March 14, 2021
Question

PS performance issues high-res images, many layers. Mac upgrade suggestions.

  • March 14, 2021
  • 2 replies
  • 541 views

Hello,

I have PS performance-related issues. I work with composite images in high resolution, sometimes hundreds of layers of different kinds, large files. I always get performance issues at the end of my projects when file sizes are large. I do it as a profession and the slow loading time hurts my deadlines.

 

After trying different solutions (see lists), I want to upgrade my system, but I want to make sure I buy hardware to make a substantial change.

 

Questions:

  • Firstly, is there anything I can try before replacing the system to give a substantial performance boost? (see list underneath what I already tried)
  • How much physical memory can PS use? 
  • Will I get diminishing results the more RAM I add?
  • Would it be beneficial to add a larger SSD scratch disk? (current 500GB)

 

I'm looking at the 2019 Mac Pro

  • Is it beneficial to have higher GHz and fewer cores or lower GHz with more cores in PS? (3,2 with 12-core or 3,5 with 8-core)
  • Radeon Pro 580X GB Radeon Pro Vega II 32GB

 

Common issues are:

  1.  Spinning wheel
  2.  In general long loading times
  3.  Slow brushes (using the brush ques up its "brush activities")
  4.  Moving layers/adjustment layers are slow
  5.  Transforming layers/adjustment layers takes a long time
  6.  Converting to smart objects are very, very slow
  7.  Saving files takes a very long
  8. Occasonaly PS craches.

 

Things I've tried and workflow:

  • I applied many PS performance guide settings, and I've returned to the guide many times during the years to update myself.
  • I upgraded my ram to 64GB
  • Installed 500GB SSD USB 3.0 as a scratch disk and used it as the primary scratch disk
  • I permanently save my PSB files on my internal SSD for faster saves
  • I close all other software and activities that are not necessary, that takes up RAM and processor power
  • When files grow too big, I convert sections of images to smart objects, making the file easier to work with. But it makes other parts of workflow slower
  • Efficiency is almost always at 100% when I check
  • I frequently purge cache in PS and also have software to "purge/allocates" RAM. However, that works.

 

My specifications:

Manufacturer: Mac Pro late 2013

Processor: 3.5ghz 6-core Intel-Xeon 

RAM: 64GB (4 x 16.0GB 1866MHz) 

Graphics cards: D500 x 2 with 

Storage: 1tb of internal storage. I also use a 

Scratch disk: 500GB SSD as scratch disk connected with USB3

 

I very much appreciate all comments and feedback.

Regards Andreas

 

 

This topic has been closed for replies.

2 replies

D Fosse
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 14, 2021

Photoshop procssing has three critical components:

scratch disk

scratch disk

scratch disk

 

Get a 1TB NVMe drive (aka PCIe M.2) and use that as scratch.

 

This is all about data throughput. There is no such thing as "enough RAM", no matter how much you put in there. It will always go to scratch regardless. RAM is just a fast access cache to the scratch disk's main memory - but the new NVMe drives are so fast that it's no longer a bottleneck like it used to be.

 

Lately, the GPU has entered into the equation. Not because Photoshop needs astronomical GPU speed or performance, but because it has to work without problems, and certain standards need to be met.

 

This puts you at a bit of a disadvantage on the Mac platform, because you have limited choices in GPU, other than a menu to pick from. You also cannot update the driver separately if you run into problems. It's all integrated into the OS, and driver problems means you have to wait for OS updates. Video driver problems are quite common in Photoshop, whether Mac or Windows. We see quite a lot of them here.

D Fosse
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 14, 2021

PS - the above is based on configuring a new machine.

 

As for upgrading the existing machine, my reaction was the same as Dave's above: USB is a problem. The scratch disk should be on an internal interface, SATA if you don't have M.2 ports.

davescm
Community Expert
Community Expert
March 14, 2021

I am a Windows user not Mac, so I'm not familiar with Macs, but the obvious question is can you attach the scratch disk internally rather than via USB3 ? You don't say which version of USB3 you are using but 3.0 has a slower transfer rate than internal Sata6 

Dave

 

 

Andreas Varro
Participant
March 14, 2021

Thank you for your reply.
I use USB 3.0 for the current scratch disk. Unfortunately, an internal second disk is not possible in late 2013 - but it would, of course, be possible if I purchased 2019. I will keep that in mind as an upgrade if I choose to replace my system.

Thank you again,

Andreas Varro
Participant
March 14, 2021

I take back my statement, my existing internal disk is possible to upgrade, but I would need to use the same disk for my OS.