A public web site (and advertisement for the services offered, including photography purposed travel tours) has a video of a comparison between the Adobe denoising and DxO Pure Raw 3 (PR3)
As I do not pay Adobe rent, but use PhotoLab6 Elite complete (PL6EC) current, I cannot do such a comparison myself. Pure Raw 3 did better with less compute time than the Adobe offering. Do PL6EC and PR3 use the same de-noising technology?
It is my understanding that they do, eventually. The dev. cycle seems to be that in the autumn, DxO releases the next version of PL. If any of the new features in that new version involve denoising then those new features do not become part of PureRAW until the next version of PureRAW is released, which is typically in the following spring.
Yes they are essentially the same, however, DeepPRIME and DeepPRIME XD processing in PhotoLab can be modified significantly by users which is not available in PureRAW.
Mark
Yes and no. Its the same technology yes, called DeepPrime and DeepPrimeXD, but PhotoLab offers more control over how noise is applied and how much of it, and how other tools interact with the DeepPrime, allowing for custom tailored results specific to an image you are working on.
DXO Pure RAW, while using same basic technology, offers just few presets on how to apply noise reduction and many times its works fine, but sometimes its too aggressive. This is where Adobe Noise reduction AI often does a better job. However when you work with DXO DeepPrime or DeepPrimeXD noise redaction AI tools in their full application, PhotoLab, than you can tweak it in ways that Adobe cannot be tweaked, allowing for slightly better results. But Adobe is very good and easy to use with only one slider. Does a great job most of the time. But where Adobe fails and DXO PureRAW fails as well, PhotoLab offers a bit more control that can provide better results.
This is mostly related to what is favored. High or low frequency details vs noise. PhotoLab has a slider that allows you to tweak not just the amount overall, like in Adobe, but also do you want to reduce more noise and leave more smooth surface or do you want to reduce less noise and leave more texture in the image. By tweaking that, its possible to get a bit better results than Adobe can. Other than that both Adobe and DXO do great job at noise reduction and recovery of details.
There is a bit of Advantage in Astrophotography images with stars that I would give Adobe, but like I said, with manual tweaking its possible to get similar or slightly better results in PhotoLab as well.