Why is Photoshop CS4 so slow? [2009]

[kims02]

Hi,

I know there's probably a lot of talk on this - there is doing google searches.

I recently upgraded to CS4. All other programs are great (ID, DW, etc.) but Photoshop... I'm ready to go back to Photoshop CS3.

When I turn the guides on and off it looks like some sort of animation effect they take so long to turn on and off. Moving the artboard around and zooming in and out is horrible.All over slow!

I have all the latest drivers of everything. Is there anything I can do?

Thanks.

(Year added to subject)

[-_AXS_-]

No it's not mate, it's direct experience.

(I don't do adverts.)   

Direct experience in changing everything when a problem rise.. hmm.
I had a direct experience of many "Techie-problem solvers" that were ready to format a customer HD when they cannot open the web browser. This is Sparta.

Even Worse, you do promote a method so istinctively you are not even aware of it.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

But this risks to go Out Of Topic. So I cut it here.

Stick with your system, I prefer to look for solutions.

Back to the "Slow CS4":

I guess there is a mix of crashing details partially due to the Video Driver Options, partially pushed by PS new potentials that affects the "normal use" of Photoshop in simply opening and editing a photo.

I was able to fix one of my customer "slowness" after losing a lot of time in trying things, pushing buttons, checking squares, restart the app and so on..

But in the end we did it.

Unfortunately it's hard to specify a method that can be followed, since the variables we did change were so many that tracking down the steps would have been a smart move (that we didn't do )

Next time I will try to reconstruct the "actions line" that could help.

Enjoy the weekend

PLF

[Guest]

Even Worse, you do promote a method so istinctively you are not even aware of it.

http://www.storyofstuff.com/

Nice video.

Unfortunately for your argument it promotes all the things I too am striving for!

(Also I don't live in the US of Waste.)

[str4ngS]

Nice video.

Unfortunately for your argument it promotes all the things I too am striving for!

Unfortunately, Adobe and its corporate attitude completely matches to this film's world outlook, at most when talking about video editing. There are several more serious problems than UI lag in Photoshop CS4.

[Guest]

Stop trying to draw attention to your film post. If you want a fire fight post the link and your political view point in the lounge where it should be.

[Semaphoric]

I thought this thread died last Summer, but it's turned into a brain-eating zombie thread.

[str4ngS]

Stop trying to draw attention to your film post. If you want a fire fight post the link and your political view point in the lounge where it should be.

Why should I stop relating to other threads? What leading Adobe Forum's community members wrote in that thread perfectly represents Adobe's real corporate attitude (you're only good for buying it, if you want bugs fixed, buy it again). They don't support a $800 software for even one year. I think that thread has many things in common with this thread, that's why I linked it.

I thought this thread died last Summer, but it's turned into a brain-eating zombie thread.

It should've been dead, but unfortunately these slowdown issues haven't been fixed since last summer. Be glad, you're not a "disappointed zombie", but one day you don't want to spend your money on your 20th new computer, get back here and think this over again. I'm sorry if this thread eats up your brain, but CS4 also eats up many people's CPU who use it. If you don't know what I'm talking about, just read my previous posts.

[Guest]

I am not going to dwell on that one sided jaded movie very much. The city I live in has a extreamly active recycle program. We recycle everything from newspapers to cardboard to carpet, you name it. Even the plastic bags from supermarkets can be turned back in to the supermarket in a 50 gallon drum sitting by the front entrance. So not everybody and every city is waste.

As far as PS CS4 being slow I do not have that problem. I have a 4 core AMD 965 with 8 gigs of Gaming RAM. Windows Vista Ultimate 64 bit. Photoshop CS4 uses the 3rd and 4th core. Cores one and two are not even touched. When I thumb thru the tabs in Preferences the 3rd and 4th core do not even breathe hard. One itsy bitsy spike in the forth core on selecting each tab the first time. The second time there is no core movement suggesting it is stored in memory.

The only lag I see is when I hit a tool bar for the first time and it thinks for like one little second. However, this is a known issue (a non-issue for me) that everybody knows about who has CS4.

Some filters I can sit and watch cycle from top to bottom during application. Not all filters, just some like glass effects.

As for using the rest of the software: Everything is BAM right in my face blazing fast.

[Guest]

dec9 wrote:

As for using the rest of the software: Everything is BAM right in my face blazing fast.

Same here  – I never cease to be amazed by the sheer speed!

Intel 5400 chipset
Intel Xeon E5410 (2.33GHZ, 1333Mhz, 2x6MB, Quad Core)
8GB DDR2 667 Quad Channel Memory 667MHz
512MB PCIe x16 nVidia Quadro FX 3700
160GB (7,200 rpm) SATA
Two 500GB (7,200 rpm) SATA
Windows Vista Business (64-bit)

[str4ngS]

As far as PS CS4 being slow I do not have that problem. I have a 4 core AMD 965 with 8 gigs of Gaming RAM. Windows Vista Ultimate 64 bit. Photoshop CS4 uses the 3rd and 4th core. Cores one and two are not even touched. When I thumb thru the tabs in Preferences the 3rd and 4th core do not even breathe hard.

You really touched the spot. This is exactly what I'm talking about. You along with your 4 core "power station" won't feel any difference in speed, because there are too much resources to be wasted. I have a Pentium 4 2.00GHz single-core CPU and 1 GB of memory. On this computer the difference can be felt between PS 7.0 and CS4, so you have just proven the obvious again: Photoshop is getting slower and more inefficient over its releases, because developers don't really care about optimizing the code (and designing CPU-efficient UI, unlike the one that CS4 has now) and if it gets a bit slower, they think: no problem, they (us, the consumers) will buy (or already have) high-end computers, there's much to waste so no need to optimize, it's a waste of time. And if some bastard like me complains, it's much easier to either just raise system requirements or talk to the wind they don't release inefficient applications. Well, if you do your measurements on a power station, you will find that they definitely do not release inefficient apps, because it won't look inefficient on computers that have enough resources to be wasted. I hope Adobe developers realize the meaning of this at last and they will fix this issue in the next version or release an "Interface Lag update" like they have released a fix for "brush lag" in update 11.0.1.

[Guest]

str4ngS wrote:

developers don't really care about optimizing the code (and designing CPU-efficient UI, unlike the one that CS4 has now) and if it gets a bit slower, they think: no problem, they (us, the consumers) will buy (or already have) high-end computers,

This is where you are miissing the point.

Photoshop is a professional level application for graphics professionals – not consumers.

if you make your living with a tool you make sure you have the best.

[str4ngS]

This is where you are miissing the point. Photoshop is a professional level application for graphics professionals – not consumers.

I meant consumers in common, but hell yes, users of Photoshop CS4 are consumers by common means. That's another thing what you're talking about is that consumers of Photoshop CS4 are graphics professionals. 90% of these graphics professionals don't recognize the point you're missing too: lack of optimization and the difference between efficiently written code and a bloaty one. That's why Adobe is still alive. This 90% of graphics professionals don't know what computer they should buy for their professional work so they ask Harm Millard, who tells them to buy a "power station" and proudly says "who cares about wasting?". Five years after this power station starts to seem slow, so the professional asks again, then another community professional from this forum tells him to buy another "power station".

[Guest]

I hand build my systems to upgrade later on if need be. Example: Just incase one of the hamsters gets tired spinning the wheel around in a circle I can quickly swap them out and not lose any work.

There is no replacement for displacement.

[Guest]

The brush lag update did resolve (or at least reduce) some other

issues, as well. If you remember the "CS4 Is A Disaster" thread,

there were quite a few different problems that folks were

experiencing. I personally never had much of a brush lag problem per

se but experienced slowdown in performance of functions and interface

including basic stuff such as everyday use of curves for color

manipulation. The update did help but overall the program is still

slower and "buggier" in some regards compared with CS2 (even w/Open

GL disabled). Thus I still find myself preferring CS2 for a lot of my

work, especially when using a dual monitor setup.

IMHO a reasonable solution would be for Adobe developers to

thoroughly test new versions on the actual machines they say are

minimum requirements. How about a public beta? Adobe has said there

are too many combinations, etc. to do proper testing but the Open GL

problems also exist (apparently to a lesser extent) on the Mac

platform. So the "too many options" excuse doesn't fly as the number

of hardware combinations on a Mac are relatively limited. For me this

is proof enough that there is an underlying code problem pertaining

to the recent incorporation of Open GL into the program, among other

things, which should have been resolved prior to release of CS4.

Interestingly, I received an email from NVidia shortly after I

purchased CS4 claiming that they had just released a new ($1500!)

card that was designed specifically for CS4. Hmmmm!

I agree Adobe should resolve these issues in the next version but

they should also concurrently provide an update for those who

otherwise have no need or desire to upgrade (and likely encounter a

whole new set of problems which seem to increase exponentially with

each release of PS). FWIW, Medieval P4 3.2 GHz, 3 GB RAM, 512 MB Video RAM.

[captaincranky]

Les_Helgeson wrote:

I agree Adobe should resolve these issues in the next version but

they should also concurrently provide an update for those who

otherwise have no need or desire to upgrade (and likely encounter a

whole new set of problems which seem to increase exponentially with

each release of PS). FWIW, Medieval P4 3.2 GHz, 3 GB RAM, 512 MB Video RAM.

Perhaps you're right, but still, Adobe doesn't really seem inclined to offer updates for older program versions, or fix problems in new releases. What they are more inclined to do is pile program modules onto the back of the same old tired horse. The sad part of all this is, that despite all the railing against these practices, I really don't anticipate any of this changing, do you?

So, unlike an OS, you can't say Adobe will discontinue support at xx/xx/xxxx date, since it was really never there in the first place, which begs the question, "why bother to update at all"?

So, the PSE forum is full of the same opinions and "hopes" for deliverance from this BS, but perhaps it's like the old saying, "there's a sucker born every minute". (Should I attribute that to P.T. Barnum or W.C. Fields)?

I wouldn't buy either PSE-7 or PSCS-4 until I was able to do so at 1/2 price or less. I suppose I could also find a reason to complain bitterly, but a bargain is still a bargain. Besides, complaining is too theraputic, and I'd rather deal with the "wind in your face" feeling of pent up rage. Invigorating, is it not?

[str4ngS]

IMHO a reasonable solution would be for Adobe developers to thoroughly test new versions on the actual machines they say are minimum requirements.

This is a good idea, but as far as I see now they rather raise minimum requirements than spend hours on testing.

Interestingly, I received an email from NVidia shortly after I purchased CS4 claiming that they had just released a new ($1500!) card that was designed specifically for CS4. Hmmmm!

Big-big shame if hardware gets designed for software.

[blunderbuss5]

I really enjoyed the rants in this post, and thought I'd share a little story.

At my in house design gig, my boss didn't like his computer because photoshop cs4 was running slowly on it.  This didn't surprise the tech department because he routinely edits 4 Gig files with it.  So he has them build a new computer and gives the old one to me, and it's really amazing; 16 cores, 32 Gigs of memory, yet photoshop cs4 runs at a crawl.

Out of curiosity I just put the cs4 trial on my home workstation, and same problem.  I have a very common GeForce 7600 graphics card, with the latest drivers.

So that's the story of how CS4 scored me a new computer!

[Lord_Forklift]

Why is Photoshop CS4 so slow?

Because you have "Vertical Sync" enabled.

To disable it, go to

      "Edit > Preferences > Performance... > (GPU Settings:) Advanced Settings... > (General:) Vertical Sync

and untick "Vertical Sync".

It's quite sad that even the technical staff didn't know about this.

Cheers.

[Guest]

Peo

ple who buy $1,500 video cards should also buy or build a system to take advantage of the card.

Carriage return compliments of Jive.

[D Fosse]

This thread from 2009 was apparently revived by a robo-spam post - but what a thread! 😉 It puts everything into perspective. I urge everybody who regularly answers questions here to read this. Enjoy 😉

[davescm]

Should have sold popcorn with that one 🙂

Dave