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⚠️ Please note that this topic or post has been archived.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. ⚠️

Exporting benchmarks v2

Igor Dmitriev
  • Edited

There is a thread with attempt to collect CO export benchmark statistics on different machines

So everyone could use this information to build/buy a good computer for CO workflow.

I suggest to improve this bench with fixed set of RAW files, so the collected bench data would be more accurate: it will depend mostly on computer specification (CPU and GPU first), but not on RAW files type (Canon, Nikon, Sony and all other RAW types affect export speed).

So here is the benchmark algorithm:

  1. Download the following zip with RAW files and unpack them to some folder
    50 photos made with Canon 5D mk3, size about 1.3GB. Theese photos were made by myself so no property rights are violated 😊

  2. Start CO and ensure that GPU acceleration is enabled: menu Edit - Preferences - General tab - Hardware acceleration - Processing set to Auto (if it was set to "Never" before, you need to restart CO so changes are applied)

  3. Open RAW files that were downloaded on step 1 and wait until they are fully imported (previews are built by CO).

  4. Set up the following export parameters:
    Format: JPEG
    Quality: 100%
    ICC Profile: sRGB IEC61966-2.1
    Resolution: 300 px/in
    Scale: Fixed 100%
    Open with: None

    ❗️ It is very important to set up export with theese parameters! Otherwise the bench results won't be reliable!
  5. Make the first export (GPU accelerated) noting the duration of this process.
    At least one export process is needed. However it would be great if you'll be able to make it 2 or 3 times, because results may vary depending on HDD caching, computer background processes and others. Take the shortest time duration - it is the first bench result.

  6. Disable GPU acceleration: menu Edit - Preferences - General tab - Hardware acceleration - Processing set to Never. Restart the CO.

  7. Make the second export (no GPU acceleration) in a similar way as in step 5.
    That will be the second bench result.

  8. Make a post at this thread with the following format:
    - Computer type (PC/Mac) and model (if any) and OS version
    - CPU+GPU - benchmark time 1
    - CPU only - benchmark time 2
    - CPU model
    - GPU model
    - CO version

You can also make the second benchmark for TIFF export format - it would be good addition to previous JPEG benchmark. Current version of CO (11.0) is limited in perfomance when exporting to JPEG format due to internal algorithms. So TIFF export would show better results in some circumstances, consuming more hardware power. Theese TIFF export parameters are needed to be set up:

. . .
Here is a myself-written Windows utility that will help to easily calculate benchmark results: it analyzes all files in selected folder and automatically calculates time span between opening of first file for writing and last file modifying.
. . .
Suggestions for benchmark improvements are very welcomed!
Hope my post doesn't look to rigorous 😊
The only goal of this thread is to help each other with selecting hardware components for best CO workflow experience.

0

Comments

135 comments

Date Votes
  • Andrey Nikiforov
    CraigJohn wrote:
    I'd love to see what the 8700K and the new 8-core i7 CPUs could do.

    Would also like to know what the new Mac Mini with an eGPU can do. Heard the poor thermal paste is really holding the performance of the Mac Mini back.

    But I am tempted by the new MacBook Pro now... Just need more money. 😊


    I have MacMini 2018 with i5 and eGPU with Radeon RX580 (4gb version) and result for CPU + GPU (TIFF) is 30 seconds
    0
  • Chad Dahlquist
    Whitesnake wrote:
    Chad Dahlquist wrote:
    Whitesnake just want to say thanks for taking the time and posting
    really been wanting to get a new macbook and was so curious about the speeds 😊
    my built pc rips of course but I want a new macbook 😊 I am a OS X guy way more than a PC and wanted something on location big time

    especially with the eGPU !


    You‘re welcome.

    I think the slowest 6-Core CPU is the best choice, since it is cooler and the whole system is much more silent and there is less thermal throtteling. My eGPU-setup was chosen for the best performance but it should be also silent. I connected the fans of the case to the Vega 56, so they only run if the Vega-fans are spinning. A Vega 64 would be faster, but consumes much more energy and isn‘t as silent. I think more cores in a CPU doesn‘t make the deal, it‘s all about RAM and the GPU since during rendering the CPU isn‘t used 100%.


    agree on the cpu choice from everything I read on the new macbooks for that exact reason 😊
    I do think for me the 32GB is key also
    egpu will be at some point 😊 for now on location tether and use my main computer I have now for C1 at home but good info on the egpu when I do get one will be when my wife needs a new computer which will be soon and see whats out this spring 😊
    0
  • Chad Dahlquist
    NN863214 wrote:


    I have MacMini 2018 with i5 and eGPU with Radeon RX580 (4gb version) and result for CPU + GPU (TIFF) is 30 seconds

    how much mem do you have in it 😊

    what was the jpg time to please 😊

    thanks 😊
    0
  • Andrey Nikiforov
    Chad Dahlquist wrote:
    NN863214 wrote:


    I have MacMini 2018 with i5 and eGPU with Radeon RX580 (4gb version) and result for CPU + GPU (TIFF) is 30 seconds

    how much mem do you have in it 😊

    what was the jpg time to please 😊

    thanks 😊

    32 gb RAM. Ok, today I retest with jpg today
    0
  • Ronald Smits
    Scores:

    Windows 10 1809

    Jpg export
    GPU + CPU: 38 sec
    CPU only: 69 sec

    TIFF export:
    GPU + CPU: 22 sec
    CPU only: 52 sec

    Gigabyte Aorus Pro
    Intel 9700K running @ 5Ghz
    32GB RAM
    NVMe Samsung 970evo 250GB
    Gigabyte Radeon RX580 8GB

    CO 11.3.1
    0
  • Andrey Nikiforov
    Scores:

    OS X Mojave 10.14.2

    JPG
    GPU + CPU: 50 sec
    CPU only: 93 sec

    TIFF export:
    GPU + CPU: 30 sec
    CPU only: 69 sec

    MacMini 2018
    i5 CPU
    32 Gb RAM
    internal SSD 256 gb
    external GPU (with RazerCore X) Gigabyte Radeon RX580 4Gb
    CO 12.0.0.270
    0
  • Zdenek Jancik
    JPEG
    CPU + GPU 0:47
    CPU only 1:46

    TIFF
    CPU + GPU 0:30
    CPU only 1:24

    TIFFs reading from NVMe SSD writing at SATA SSD
    CPU + GPU 0:30

    My system
    i7 6700k overclocked to 4.5GHZ to all cores
    16 GB RAM
    MSI GTX 1060 6GB
    SSDs: Samsung 960 Evo (system, CO and CO catalog), Corsair MX550
    Windows 10 Pro, CO 10.2.1
    0
  • Zdenek Jancik
    It is interesting, that results from CO12 are almost identical as from CO10 (see my post above)

    Capture One 12
    JPEG
    CPU + GPU 0:46
    CPU only 1:48

    TIFF
    CPU + GPU 0:30
    CPU only 1:25
    0
  • Martin Knowles
    MacBook Pro 2018 (13", 2.7GHz, 16GB RAM)

    JPG:
    CPU only: 1:46
    Internal GPU: 1:52
    eGPU (Vega64 8GB, Razer Core X): :51

    TIF8, uncompressed:
    CPU Only: 3:04
    eGPU: 0:26
    Didn't bother to bench the internal GPU on this one

    CO12, Mojave (10.14.2)
    0
  • cdc
    Win 10 1809
    CO 12.0.1
    i9-9900k (no OC)
    RTX 2060

    I also included the difference between everything on one SSD vs the session & images stored on an HDD

    CO12 & Session + Images on one SSD
    JPG:
    CPU+GPU 40s
    CPU 89s

    TIFF:
    CPU+GPU 21s
    CPU 69s

    CO12 on SSD/Session & Images on HDD
    JPG:
    CPU+GPU 45s
    CPU 89s

    TIFF:
    CPU+GPU 32s
    CPU 71s
    0
  • Ario
    Mojave 10.14.4
    MacBook Pro 2018 15", 2.9GHz, 32 Gb RAM
    Vega 20, Blackmagic Pro (Vega 56)

    TIFF CPU+GPU 16 sec
    JPEG CPU + GPU 48 sec
    0
  • craig stodola
    NN863214 wrote:
    Scores:

    OS X Mojave 10.14.2

    JPG
    GPU + CPU: 50 sec
    CPU only: 93 sec

    TIFF export:
    GPU + CPU: 30 sec
    CPU only: 69 sec

    MacMini 2018
    i5 CPU
    32 Gb RAM
    internal SSD 256 gb
    external GPU (with RazerCore X) Gigabyte Radeon RX580 4Gb
    CO 12.0.0.270



    This is eye-opening for an i5 CPU. Impressive. ...very impressive. 😉
    0
  • Dirk Wenzel
    Computer type:
    MacMini (Late 2012) 16GB, and OS 10.14.4 (18E226)
    --> No Times without iGPU HD 4000... not used?

    CPU model: 2,6 GHz Intel Core i7
    iGPU model: Intel HD Graphics 4000 1.5 GB
    eGPU model: Radeon RX 580 8 GB
    CO 10.2.1

    Scores:

    JPEG:
    - CPU+iGPU (Intel HD 4000):
    - 02min 53 sec (173sec)

    - CPU+eGPU (AMD RX580)
    - 01min 5sec (65sec)

    TIF 8bit:
    - CPU+iGPU (Intel HD 4000):
    - 02min 40 sec (160sec)

    - CPU+eGPU (AMD RX580)
    - 00min 39sec (39sec)

    Read from ext. USB 3 SSD, output to internal SSD

    best regards
    0
  • Joshua Marrah
    a few computers here to compare:

    2011 imac (CO12) (high sierra)
    3.4ghz i7
    8bg ram
    amd radeon hd 6970m

    jpg:
    -cpu 2:49
    -gpu 1:49

    tiff:
    -cpu 2:29
    -gpu 1:35

    its odd, I would say that the GPU times are the same simply because I am CPU bound, but CPU usage is not 100% consistently. This is also an older system with ddr3 ram, curious if that has some effect? Overall no hardware is consistently at 100% so tough to find a bottleneck at the moment and trying to plan a new build.

    I'll try and upload same machine but windows boot here soon.


    hackintosh (CO11) (running mojave)
    xeon e3-1246v3 (essentially an i7-4970)
    tested with both a rx580 and a vega 64

    JPG:
    -CPU 2:15
    -rx580 1:07
    -Vega64 1:06

    TIFF:
    -CPU 1:53
    -RX580 0:36
    -Vega64 0:34
    0
  • Zdenek Jancik
    It is interesting to see how much better graphic card helps.

    Capture One 12
    JPEG
    CPU + GPU 0:46 (GPU is GTX 1060 6GB)
    CPU + GPU 0:35 (GPU is GTX 2070 8GB)

    Rest of the system is following
    i7 6700k overclocked to 4.5GHZ to all cores
    16 GB RAM
    SSDs: Samsung 960 Evo (system, CO and CO catalog)
    0
  • dee jjjaaaa
    C1 v12.1

    W10x64

    JPEG

    CPU ( i9700K all 8 cores @ base 4.9Ghz freq) + GPU ( GTX 1070 Ti 8Gb ) = 0:30

    all files were on a 16 Gb RAM disk which eliminates any and all disk effect at all (RAM disk is a magnitude+ faster than even prototyped PCIe 4.0 SSD)
    0
  • Matthew Varney
    Mac Pro 5,1 (2009) with macOS 10.13.6
    2X Xeon X5675, 12 cores total at 3.06 GHz base
    2X Radeon R9 280X (MSI Gaming 3G)
    C1 v12.1.1

    JPEG
    CPU + GPU: 51s (0:51)
    CPU only: 117s (1:57)
    0
  • B
    I guess Capture One Pro takes advantage only a single GPU and doesnt care about the brand between AMD and Nvidia?
    0
  • SFA
    NN635412303032341950UL wrote:
    I guess Capture One Pro takes advantage only a single GPU and doesnt care about the brand between AMD and Nvidia?


    Look in the log files to find out.
    0
  • OddS.
    NN635412303032341950UL wrote:
    I guess Capture One Pro takes advantage only a single GPU and doesnt care about the brand between AMD and Nvidia?



    Quote from: https://www.phaseone.com/en/Search/Arti ... cleid=1720

    How many GPUs can I use with Capture One?
    Capture One supports up to four GPUs, but for optimum performance ensure that these are form the same manufacturer, i.e. AMD or Nvidia.
    0
  • Brian Jones
    Video cards seem to have much more impact than CPU.

    MBP2018 2.9 6-core I9 32gb RAM Radeon Pro560x
    OSX10.14.3 C1 12.1
    Egpu Radeon RX580

    Egpu Jpg 40.05
    Egpu Tiff 26.55

    EGPU Open CL off
    Jpg 1:22.82
    Tiff 1:08.55

    DGPU
    Jpg 55.53
    Tiff 30.2

    2013 Mac Pro 3.5 6-core Xeonon 32gb ram Dual D500
    OSX10.14.3 C1 12.1

    Jpg 37.01
    Tiff 19.36

    Open CL off
    Jpg 1:41.14
    Tiff 1:19.82

    I am amazed that a 6 year old machine outperforms a current machine with an additional eGPU. The Mac Pro was money well spent.
    0
  • Adrian Petrean
    PC, Windows 10, I9-9900K, 32GB, GPU - RTX 2060 Super, SSD Intel

    JPG:

    CPU+GPU: 0:31
    CPU: 1:23
    0
  • Stephan Riedelbeck
    PC, AMD Ryzen 3900x Capture One 12.1.3.2 Win 10 1903 No OC
    NVidia KFA2 RTX 2060 super
    GPU-tiff -> 14s
    GPU-jpeg -> 31s
    CPU-jpeg -> 65s
    CPU-tiff -> 53s
    0
  • Dieda
    PC with Windows10
    Ryzen7 1800X - Sapphire Pulse Vega 56 (quiet BIOS)
    C1 version - 12.1.4

    JPEG
    CPU + GPU - 43 sec
    CPU only - 121 sec

    TIFF
    CPU + GPU - 20 sec
    CPU only - 115 sec
    0
  • Thomas D.
    7820X 4.3 GHZ Allcore, 64GB Ram 2666, RTX 5000 ECC on, Optane Drive 960 GB (OS + Raws)

    CO 20 (13.000)

    TIFF 16bit:
    (With Manipulations)
    GPU + CPU : 37 Sec.
    CPU: 128 Sec. (2 min 8 sec.)

    TIFF 16bit:
    (No Manipulations (Standart)
    GPU + CPU: 24 sec.
    CPU: 67 Sec.

    JPEG:
    (No Manipulations (Standart)
    CPU + GPU: 37 sec.
    CPU: 75 sec. (1 min 15sec.)

    JPEG:
    (With Manipulations)
    GPU + CPU: 47 sec.
    CPU: 140 sec. (2 min 20 sec.)
    0
  • Andrea wee
    HP zbook laptop 17 G6 with quaddro rtx5000/2286m

    JPG
    CPU+GPU=36s

    TIF
    CPU+GPU=22s
    0
  • Matthew Varney
    CO 20.0.0 can be much slower than CO 12 at exporting the 5DMkIII files used by this benchmark.
    Ryzen 7 3800X, 32GB DDR4 3200 CL14, Vega 64 Nitro+
    Samsung 970 EVO Plus SSD for everything
    Windows 10
    CO12 CO20 Diff
    JPEG CPU+GPU: 30 31 3%
    JPEG CPU: 74 94 27%
    TIFF CPU+GPU: 11 16 45%
    TIFF CPU: 61 79 30%
    This is true in macOS and Windows and on a 2012 Mac Pro (both OSes) and the Ryzen 3800X system. The % difference is generally even worse on the Mac (up to 61%). I took the best of 3 runs in each case.
    The difference is much less with Nikon D810 files (0% to 13% worse on Ryzen).
    There is also a large slowdown with only Spot Removal applied (24-32%) and with 18 typical adjustments (6-24%).
    0
  • Dirk Wenzel
    Just for comparison new MacOSX Catalina & C1 20

    Computer type:
    MacMini (Late 2012) 16GB,
    MacOSX 10.15.2 (19C57) Catalina
    CPU model: 2,6 GHz Intel Core i7
    iGPU model: Intel HD Graphics 4000 1.5 GB
    eGPU model: Radeon RX 580 8 GB
    CO 20 Pro Build 13.01.19 MacOSX
    C1 never uses iGPU Intel 4000!

    Scores:

    JPEG:
    CPU+eGPU (AMD RX580 8GB, via GigaByte Gaming Box RX580)
    --> 1min 8sec, (68sec)
    --> 01min 5sec (65sec) C1 10.x and MacOS 10.14.x, April 2019

    TIF 8bit:
    CPU+eGPU (AMD RX580 8GB, via GigaByte Gaming Box RX580)
    --> 50sec
    --> 39sec C1 10.x and MacOS 10.14.x, April 2019

    Read from ext. USB 3 SSD, output to internal SSD
    How much better could be a new (2018) MacMini ?
    6-Core i7, 32GB, 1 GB SSD. Plus eGPU RX580?

    best regards
    0
  • WPNL
    Dirk3 wrote:
    Just for comparison new MacOSX Catalina & C1 20

    How much better could be a new (2018) MacMini ?
    6-Core i7, 32GB, 1 GB SSD. Plus eGPU RX580?

    best regards


    check:
    https://phodograf.com/export-benchmarks/
    0
  • Thomas D.
    CPU: Time CPU Time GPU
    7820X =//.67.//=/.100%./=/ .24./=/100% RTX 5000

    3900X=//.53.//=/.126,42%./=/.14./=/171,43% KFA2 RTX 2060 super

    1800X=//.115.//=/.58,26%./=/.20./=/120,00% Sapphire Pulse Vega 56

    9900K=//.71.//=/.94,37%./=/.31./=/77,42% RTX 2060 Super

    3960X =//.44. /=/.152%./=/ .4,46./=/ 537,74% RTX 5000 --> WTF?! (Theory)

    Is This Realistic or did i something wrong?

    Each 4 Cores = + 26,42% (Theory)

    If True: Shut off an take my Money!!!!!
    0

Please sign in to leave a comment.

Didn't find what you were looking for?

New post