Skip to main content

⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived. The information contained here may no longer be accurate or up-to-date. ⚠️

Viewport Update Speed (C1 21)

mattspace
  • Edited

Before I change my file storage methodlogy, I just wanted to check:

Is the speed at which the viewport goes from pixelated to full-resolution when zooming in to (and moving around while zoomed) a RAW file that has just been loaded in the Viewer dependent on the speed at which the RAW file's storage is connected?

ie would you expect that to take longer if your file storage is on a file server over 1GB ethernet, Vs. on an internal SSD?

I assume it would, that if I'm zooming soon enough that the system hasn't finished loading the file over the network (the catalogue itself is local), I would expect to have to wait in a blocky view for several seconds, but I want to be sure.

Thanks,

0

Comments

7 comments

Date Votes
  • BeO
    • Edited
    Top Commenter

    Hi mattspace, 

    I was interested in the performance of my system too, as I haven't done this since my last motherboard/CPU upgrade. Here are some test results:

    New catalog C1 v22 with (2x) 157 images
    C1 preview size 2048
    Monitor res 1920x1200

    • 157 Image files stored on old Synology NAS, 2 HDDs in RAID1 configuration (RAID setup not for speed but for redundancy)
    • Same 157 image files also stored on internal Samsung SSD, for comparison
    • 1 Gbit network

    157 image files breakdown:

    • 3 panorama DNGs between 350-970 MB
    • 147 Nikon NEF uncompressed 60+ MB
    • 7 TIFFs 150 MB

    Preview generation time: 

    NAS:  6 minutes
      NAS network monitor reports between 25-80 MB/s download speed during preview generation

    Internal SSD: 1:20 minutes

     


    Move to next or previous image in 100% view
    NAS:

    • NEFs: 0.5-2 sec. if cached (switched to adjacent images in slow pace into the same direction e.g. forward), 
    • NEFs up to 4 sec. if not cached (switched to other images in very fast pace)
    • TIFFs: 3-6 sec.
    • DNGs: 7 - 17 sec.

    Internal SSD:

    • NEFs and TIFFs more or less instantly
    • DNGs: 1 - 3 sec.


    Export
    10 NEF files to JPG Full size/quality 

    Processed from NAS to internal SSD
      between 25-28 sec., it varies a bit in several attempts

    From internal disk SSD to same internal SSD
      23 sec.


    BUT, my graphics card is so slow that my 8 core CPU has the identical export performance (fully utilized all cores), so the network is not a real bottleneck here. The difference might be bigger if I had a fast 'export machine' when exporting from internal storage.

    CPU: 8 cores Intel i7-11700K, Window 10
    GPU: nVidia GTX 960
    (usually the same performance CPU vs. GPU)

    Conclusion, for myself: 1 Gbit network with a slow NAS is doable, and for archived images well enough suited, but I would prefer a faster network and faster NAS / RAID for anything else than occasional work.

    My test was a very basic test with not much chance to encounter occasional hiccups of the system.

     

    EDIT: If you have a file server or NAS you should do your own tests, too many variables come into play.

     

    1
  • BeO
    • Edited
    Top Commenter

    I was testing Catalog on internal SSD, image files on NAS (file server) via Ethernet cable.

    Image files on external SSD with fast connection (Thunderbolt?) is probably faster than my NAS/Ethernet. Don't understand your 4GB limit...

    EDIT: But if you already have a "slow point" with internal SSD, how should an external SSD remove it?

    1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    LoL, I thought you have all images on internal SSD and wanted to move them to a file server and want to know if that slows down your speed, but actually it is the other way round :-)

    Yes absolutely, go for an internally connected SSD for your image files, yes. And yes. Did I say 'yes' already? But probably you mean 4 TB.

    I have my NAS only for backup purposes and all image files on Samsung SATA SSDs too. 

    1
  • BeO
    Top Commenter

    You're welcome mattspace,

    My assumption is that if your Mac Pro is not ancient you should see a good improvement when zooming in, with an internal SSD.

    1
  • mattspace

    Thanks - so given my current photo library will fit within 4GB, I could put it on an SSD and remove the most significant slow point in my workflow.

    0
  • mattspace
    • Edited

    I currently have my Catalogue on an internally mounted SATA SSD, and my images on a USB3 DAS connected to a fileserver shared over 1GB Ethernet.

    I could try connecting the fileserver over Thunderbolt networking, to see if that's faster...

    The 4GB limit is the size of easily attainable Samsung Evo 870 SATA SSDs, which I can mount within my Mac Pro, and shift my image files to there.

    My thought is that the slowness I'm experiencing is the lag between the SSD preview zooming to actual size, and then the full size image being loaded over the network.

    0
  • mattspace

    hahaha, yes 4TB *facepalm* :)

    The current fileserver setup is a transitionary arrangement from an old machine that had the drives mounted internally - the new machine doesn't have bays for spinners, so I'm still migrating and updating old workflows.

    Thanks for relating your results, it's been a help ;)

    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Didn't find what you were looking for?

New post