Comparing incomparable GPU's?

DxO PhotoLab
1

In the discussions about PL 9, different kinds of trouble, and what GPU’s to use, are we comparing incomparable hardware?

Even if Nvidia uses the same names for their laptop and desktop GPU’s, my understanding is that they are not offering the same performance, or specs. My MSI laptop has a RTX 3070, according to Techspot.com the desktop version offer better performance, as with others, like the 40-series or the 50-series. Power consumption and heat seems to be the core issues.

Right now I am traveling, and my (big) monitor/display is disconnected and left at home. DXO performs far better without the display connected than with. I have noticed that some members of this forum have no, or at least few, problems while other experience crashes and error messages. Are they using their laptops without external display, or perhaps with a smaller display?

I am not an computer engineer – but my curiosity was triggered when the laptop suddenly performed better, and I started reading. My impression is that GPU numbers alone does not give enough information.

1 Like
2

Good thoughts. There are many factors at play and how much ‘screen real estate’ is being driven does change the loading on graphics hardware. If you were driving a 5K monitor at 120Hz versus a 1K monitor at 60Hz, that’s a huge differential in work required from the graphics subsystem, as well as the amount of memory it needs to handle it. Probably also it adds demands to the CPU in handing over larger amounts of data between the two. (One of the reasons I like that Apple have gone back to the shared memory model.)

3

Often when you connect an external monitor to a laptop that forces the discrete gpu to manage the display as well as being available for anything else that is demanded of it (like photo processing, etc). An IGP that is connected or internal to the CPU goes unused in this case).

Without an external monitor, the laptop display is managed by whatever IGP may be alongside or internal to the CPU leaving the discrete GPU available 100% for other tasks.

I have found no way to force windows to always use the IGP (Intel in my case) for display and leave a discrete GPU fully available for other tasks.

4

I have started to configure a new stationary Windows PC with a 5070 Ti GPU and realized there are quite a few manufacturers of these 5070 Ti GPU-cards and they all have their characteristics. Nvidia chipsets but different manufacturers.

My concern is noise level and I realize that ever increasing performance demands comes with a cost of bigger power supplies, more heat and higher demands for cooling and often noisy fans. So, a 5070 Ti 16 GB card is not just a 5070 Ti 16 GB card because there are many. This builder had 31 different 3070 TI 16 GB cards in their webb. I have to say I did not expect that coming! So, there was not any computer ordered that day :slight_smile:

5

I usually stay with MSI cards as my first choice followed by ASUS because of the generally superior build quality of those manufacturers.

Mark

1 Like
6

Thanks Mark! Their first suggestion was an MSI Ventus-card but I suspected that one for being too noisy and I’m sensitive for that and will probably ask them to use an ASUS TUF Gaming OC instead which is said to be more silent but 250 U$ more expensive.

7

I appreciate that this is a PL9 on Windows thread, and I’m typing this on a Mac running PL8. However…

When I updated my screen from a regular HD to a 4k monitor (with the old HD scren now acting as a second display on the same machine) I absolutely noticed an increase in the time it took PL to render (when it says ‘Correction preview’ at the top right of the screen) an image on the screen when I first click on it.

With just the HD screen in use the text ‘Correction preview’ was barely noticeable - blink and you missed it. With the 4k screen (plus second HD monitor), ‘Correction preview’ is there for a full second before the image snaps into full sharpness.

The other cmputer hardware remained the same from the old screen to the new.

So in my non-scientific test/experience of this, having more pixels to display does affect the responsiveness of PL.

2 Likes
8

Yes and I guess quite a few photographers use 4K monotors don’t they.

9

So they should. The two biggest “camera upgrades” I have ever made were a “retina” (high dpi) screen and PhotoLab.

1 Like
10

Yes, I have often felt that Photolab has given far more impact on the technical image quality than both cameras and lenses together with a few exceptions:

Sony’s Real Time Tracking, Eye Focus and Auto ISO Minimum Shutter Speed. All these have fundamentally changed how I take pictures today.

11

Yes, I agree.

Just one aspect of note (amongst many) has been revolutionary for me. DeepPrime has totally changed how I can work in very low light.

Regarding hardware, I’d agree with your list for Sony cameras but similar for Nikon: 3D tracking, eye AF, and their Z mount lenses which are totally useable at their widest aperture (I had a number of F mount lenses that certainly were not).

12

Maybe the most overlooked difference to for example Topaz is how much more efficient Deep Prime is and always have been compared to Topaz and how much more natural the pictures looks compared to what Topaz many times is doing to the details.

Deep Prime is Zero administration and almost always top quality results without leaving hopeless artefacts and Topaz has lots of different sharpening models that almost always leaves you looking for another one since the details gets so bad often in Topaz.

Strange with the Z-mounts that are poor wide open. In that respect Sony´s later G- and GM-lenses are much better than old lenses for analog bodies wide open and that goes even for all my new Viltrox-lenses that I think really are surprisingly good even fully open…

Look at the last picture. It looks like the lioness has been combed!

Before

image
image1730×1844 543 KB

After Topaz

image
image1674×1837 578 KB

1 Like
13

I think you mis-read my post.

The Z mount lenses are totally useable wide open (ie they are very, very good wide open - I am very happy to use them at their maximum aperture). It was always risky using a number of the old F-mount lenses wide open. Perhaps you may have mis-read ‘useable’ as ‘useless’?

Topaz definitely needs hand holding. Sharpening artefacts are a risk when using it - that poor lion, its fur looks rather prickly after Topaz!

14

Sorry, yes i did. Probably most vendor’s modern lenses are better than older ones.

1 Like