I’m trying the 30-day trial of DxO Photolab 9 and I am getting some interesting results with Olympus PEN-F Raw files. However, I am getting an anxious feeling about my hardware; CPU is i5-10500 CPU, I have 32 GB ram, but the GPU is only the one integrated in the CPU. Windows 11 is running off an NVME ssd. Some things are a bit slow and the CPU fan spins up, but not an awful lot. Some AI renders take 10 minutes. Do people think I should forget about Photolab and just stick with Affinity and Rawtherapee which are not so demanding hardware-wise?
To be honest, I think you’re asking the wrong question for this forum. It might be more appropriate in a non-DxO forum such as DPReview or mu-43. (Here, it looks like bait.) Nevertheless, perhaps it will help if I ask you this: If you forget about PhotoLab’s AI masking (which can be slow without a dedicated GPU) but use its advanced denoising features and other kinds of masks, does the software perform well enough for you? Is it only exporting that is slow for you, or onscreen rendering and live adjustments also? If you stop using all of the advanced features that Affinity and RawTherapee don’t have, is PhotoLab better for you? Only you can answer these questions.
2 Likes
Thank you for your considered reply, I can see how such a question might be seen as ‘bait’. It was not intended as such. I think the answer to your question would be a cautious ‘yes’. I have to fully accept the notion that no RAW editor, whether free, paid or subscription, is, by itself going to make me a better photographer (neither will buying a Leica!). I have found some of the free ones somewhat limited and clunky, which is what made me install the XxO 30-day trial.
@MikeH , if you look around, you can find many posts dealing with GPU requirements. Moreover, the release notes are fairly clear about the hardware needed for PhotoLab.
As @Egregius writes, AI masking can be slow. Specially the preset masks (“sky” etc.) can take a lot of time on the hardware that is approaching yardware 
. Nevertheless, the other AI masks can work with decent reaction times, at least they do with my below-requirement GPU.
Please note that AI masking is new to PhotoLab and that performance might improve if DxO progresses in that way, but I doubt that built-in GPUs are going to be up to the task, neither any time soon, nor at all.
1 Like
I too will echo what @Egregius has already said. Only you can decide if the features in PhotoLab / not in your current alternatives are something you want.
You must also consider the cost of PL. It’s not cheap. Plus, to get the full PL experience you must buy the Elite version AND you should also very seriously consider buying FilmPack. Despite its name it’s not just about film emulations. It includes important features like luminosity masking and four fine contrast sliders. You might also want ViewPoint, to get the Reshape Fusion feature.
Another cost consideration is that it’s now nearly April 2026. In about six moths time PL10 is likely to be released. When that happens will you feel as if it’s a bit too soon to be spending more on an upgrade? If so, remember you are not forced to upgrade. PL 9 will continue to work.
As to the question you pose in the subject of this topic. My opinion would be that your hardware is not up to snuff. 32 GB RAM is OK but a 10th gen CPU will be noticeably slower than a modern CPU. The major limitation though is not having a dedicate GPU. Without such the AI masking features will at best struggle more likely crash. Even if you avoid using the AI masks, export times without a dedicated GPU will always be several minutes.
Well, I went halfway and paid for PureRAW 6 and I am very pleased with the results. I find even XD3 denoises on 20 Mpixel RAWs are taking 60 to 90 seconds which is fine.