My system is near new with an i7-8700 CPU; 16GB RAM; OS & programme files & catalog on a Samsung SSD (MVie?) drive and raw files on a reasonably fast 4TB HDD. No GPU card and relying just on the Intel integrated graphics. I'm running two screens, Samsung 1920x1080 for menus (sliders) or in grid mode, and a 24 inch 1920x1200 Eizo as the main screen. Looking at the resource monitor, my CPU is running at close to 100% (4.2GHz) when processing, but RAM is rarely more than 12GB, only when doing large panorama merges. I do notice that the RAM usage is about 30% when I first start LR and then gradually creeps up over 50%, at which point I restart LR.
I understand that LR does not benefit much from GPU acceleration. The Intel graphics does not seem to get much over 10% according the resource monitor and I don't notice much difference if it is switched on or off. Happy to be corrected and get a GPU.
Is LR Classic CC 7.1 that much faster?
Thanks, Bob
There have been steady performance gains. I’m running LR 7.5 on a 2018 MacBook Pro, 2.9ghz i9 (6 core), 2TB SSD (Incredibly fast), 32 gigs of Ram, with a Radeon Pro 560x internal GPU, and when at home running a Radeon RX Vega 56 eGPU. Connect to 2 30” NEC displays running at 2560x1600.
I see little issues moving from image to the next, zooming to 100% is often instant and rarely takes more than a couple of seconds. I see no lag in scrolling a window in grid mode, over 1000 images in the grid, and I can scroll as fast as I want with no blanks and no lag. My images are from an IQ180 and IQ3 100 back, so 80 and 100mp captures.
Unfortunately I can’t tell what parts of my system are contributing to having better success than you seem to be having. I would suspect 16 gigs of ram is pretty sparse (despite what your system is reporting), I think LR uses the GPU a little more than some realize, and it can’t hurt that my SSD sustained reads are > 2500 MB/s. And I’m pretty sure version 7 is able to utilize multiple cores better than version 6.
