Photoshop CS4 is a disaster

[_ProArtist_]

I'm am just at a loss of words.

What a mess. It could not be any slower. What were you thinking Adobe?

You ripped apart the code just to add GPU support for what? To provide worse performance?

Make sure you DL the demo first... CS4 is a disaster.

The latest hardware cant even run it smoothly... Dont tell me its graphic drivers.

[_The_Debugger_]

Great news!!!

I think I actually found the root of the lagging-interface-problem that alot of you, and Adobe, have been struggeling to solve.

I was helping a friend of mine out with this. His computer has an Intel Q6600 CPU, 4GB of RAM and a NVidia 8600GTS graphics card. System is Windows XP SP2 updated to SP3 and the latest NVidia drivers.

Photoshop had huge user interface performance problems. Extremely slow and non-responsive (with and without GPU acceleration).

I then installed DirectX (using the Redistributable version from August 2008), rebooted(!), and guess what?..... It made all the difference in the world!!!
Now everything is superfast and smooth and hardware accelleration works like a charm. As an added bonus, his Lightroom program also got alot more responsive!

Don't know which DirectX version is included in Windows XP SP3, but it seems to me that it's too old to support the new Adobe user interfaces.

Hopefully I wasn't just lucky and this is indeed the solution for all of you. Well, I'm sure you guys will let me know either way.

Good luck!

PS. It probably works well with the latest DirectX (November 2008) update as well but, since it's now working, he wouldn't let me try it out :-)

[_Derrick_Moore_]

I updated my DirectX and it had no effect. What did have an effect was
unchecking 'Open Documents as Tabs'. Now with OpenGL on zooming is much
smoother than CS2, with OpenGL off it's about the same as CS2. Typing text
still has a delay to display but that's not a big deal to me.

[Guest]

amazing.

[_Kross_]

About 10 days ago I posted the same results with Nov 08 DirectX update. It didn't help other people though.

[Guest]

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.

[Walter Elias]

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.

[klsteven-vBdprK]

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

[_ProArtist_]

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.

[malojo]

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

[_Phil_Flowers_]

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

[Chris Cox]

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

[Guest]

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.

[Walter Elias]

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.

[_Lauri_Incrosnatu_]

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 :(

[Guest]

When you finished your system did you download the .net update and directx update? Neither will auto download and both are really needed to run correctly with your computer. The .net and directx are needed for your CCC to run correctly too.

Also there are 8.11 drivers that may help.

Your ram specs seem to be a little slow too that could cause a bottle neck compaired to the rest of your hardware. Might think about upgrading to the max speed that your motherboard can use. Ram is so darn cheap now.

Did you defrag after you finished your install?

Look on the internet. There are lots of sites that give free information to help speed up vista too. I did and it made a world of difference.

[klsteven-vBdprK]

David,
how do I know, wether I need a DirectX or .net update? I thought DirectX 10 (which comes with Vista) is the latest DirectX version.
Are you sure that both of them don`t update if I do a Windows update?

[Guest]

I am positive they do not update. Just knowledge from research to help my friends computer issues and building systems and such that they need updated too.

Yes Vista has 10.0. . However, you need a video card that can run 10.0. Plus whatever software that can take advantage of 10.0.

Vista still needs directx 9.0 to run your directx 9.0 software. People on here have said updating has helped with their issues with CS4. Also opengl drivers are only updated by card manufacturers.

.Net 2.0, according to ATI, is the "least" version to correctly run CCC. I was using .Net 3.0 and CCC had worked better. When my hard drive crashed a while ago I just downloaded the .Net 3.5 update and was done with it. Didn't notice any difference.

[_Lauri_Incrosnatu_]

David,

Thanks for your tips. The RAM is not a bottleneck, if you see some comparisons of "high end" superfast memorys you will see the actual difference in performance is almost non-existent. And it all comes down to used FSB.

I actually already updated the DirectX to the latest versions and installed new .Net-framework. After that I updated to catalyst 8.11.

Results: no performance improvement on phothoshop, still very laggy.

Everything else works so perfectly so the only thing that comes to mind is that Photoshop CS4 is poorly coded or the hardware requirements are ridiculous. Of course there might be something wrong on my system, but based on the amount of whine about performance I point my finger on Adobe.

[Hudechrome-sd9sPI]

The FSB question can be answered with the new Intel i7 processor with the Nehalem chipset.

[Guest]

>based on the amount of whine about performance I point my finger on Adobe.

the 2 or 3 guys whining on this forum is not a good example of a bad product. If Photoshop was performing poorly for everyone this forum would be full of complaints. like every thread would be a complaint.

So logic suggests its your computer.

[Guest]

Well the people who are regulars do not seem to being having problems.

[Guest]

Funny that!

[_Ray_Majoran_]

Actually Buko, I disagree. I run an advertising agency and know a number of people that are having problems and just aren't posting (including myself). It shouldn't take an outside group of this magnitude to waste our time responding to every post that comes through. We paid a decent price for this software and it is Adobe's responsibility to get it right. I agree with a number of people (including a number of my associates) -- this is just shotty code - plain and simple. If Adobe would like to pay us for our time to beta test, then by all means, we would consider it. But when you are going to charge $1,500 per license for a suite and then expect to launch a less-than-sufficient product, then no offense, but it's on them.

I am part of a number of beta communities for open-source software and provide a great deal of support for free. But let's face it, Adobe is not open-source (at least the last time I checked my credit card statement).

The fact of the matter is -- Adobe missed the boat when it came to building CS4 with all of its users in mind. I run Adobe ColdFusion Enterprise - an $8,000 product. We use ColdFusion to host most of our websites for a number of high-profile clients. If all of a sudden (even though we had a top-of-the-line Dell server), ColdFusion would not work because we did not meet a right video driver, I would be outraged.

Because Photoshop is a graphic-intensive program, we have generally given Adobe the benefit of the doubt and assume that they will fix their mistake in short order. But to expect that every single user that is having a problem is going to post on here is ridiculous. I made my case earlier in this thread - I do not need to waste hours a day on this.

There is an old saying - 1% of people participate while the other 99% of people absorb and do not participate. This is just reality. My point is - if 1% of your users are actually stating on a forum that there is a problem, then the actual number of people that are having the problem is probably MUCH greater. They are simply waiting in the queues for a solution.

There is a problem. Adobe needs to come up with a solution.

Ray

[Guest]

>I run Adobe ColdFusion Enterprise

I'm sorry.

[_Ray_Majoran_]

No need to be sorry - ColdFusion was the best decision we ever made. (Let's save that for another post though so that we don't clutter the real issue here.)

Ray