Aperture & Lion performance issues

Hi All,
I am running Aperture 3.1.3 and Lion 10.7.1 on a MBP 2.5 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo with 4 GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM and have:
1. Turned off faces and gestures
2. Set preview images to medium (5)
3. Turned off MobileMe "automatically check for newly published albums"
4. Turned off share previews with iWork and Ilife
5. Killed off indexing for the photo library
Aperture runs so slow at times its unusable. It can take upwards of a minute to process any changes to an image. Loading an image can take upwards of 30 seconds. HDR processing of three images is a full blown 15 minute coffee break.
I took a look at the Activity Monitor and I find that Aperture is running upwards of 3.5 GB of virtual memory and 1 GB plus of real memory. Disk I/O can hit more than 386 per second. CPU utilization runs anywhere from 10% at idle to 268% (really thats what the Activity Monitor says) when running HDR plugin.
I am running all RAW and the typical image size is 19 MB.
Today it wouldn't find my SDHC card that was plainly visible on the desktop without a reboot of the program...
It occationally crashes when exporting to JPEGs.
Occationally it hangs and needs a force quit.
Occationally makes me want to toss my MBP in the dumpster from the roof of my office and give up digital photography when it runs slow and I need to get something out of it quickly.
Anyone have any suggestions? I really don't want to switch applications (too much of a PITA) and buying a new mac would put a crimp in me saving up for a Nikon D4.
I can feel my life slipping away while I wait for Aperture to slog through its machinations and let me edit and export my images...

Your workflow may be running out of RAM and therefore "paging out" to disk. Page outs slow operation a lot and can lead to instability. As noted, switching to from 64-bit to 32-bit mode will help RAM-starved workflows.
You can evaluate whether or not you have adequate RAM by looking at the Page Outs number under System Memory on the Activity Monitor app before starting a work session; recheck after working and if the page outs number increased significantly during operation your workflow is RAM-starved. Ignore the other info in Activity Monitor.
If page outs increase significantly during operation you can add RAM or simply try to run Aperture by itself. Switching from 64-bit operation to 32-bit operation will also make some additional RAM space available.
On my 2006 MBP with its max of 3 GB RAM I always did a restart prior to a heavy Aperture session to clear any memory leaks and make sure no other apps were open. Browsers in particular will often suck RAM Aperture would otherwise be using.
The problem with running a RAM-deficient workflow like I did is that along with slower operation, page outs can reduce overall stability - - and instability always seems to present at the worst times, like in the midst of processing a time-critical project. It does help a lot to keep a really really clean workflow.
If your test of page outs does show that you are paging to disk the speed of your drives and drives connectivity become even more important than normal. Drives slow as they fill so keep drives underfilled. No more than ~70% full is a good maximum guideline, but less full is faster. Use Firewire rather than USB for external drives when possible.
OS 10.7 does seem to utilize more RAM than OS 10.6 does, and that makes sense because over time evolving OSs and evolving apps take advantage of evolving hardware. I find excellent performance with 8 GB RAM on a 17" 2.2 GHz MBP and OS 10.6.8. I suggest that those of us on 10.6.8 you should avoid 10.7 Lion unless we have at least 8 GB RAM.
IMO all Aperture users who can should routinely bump RAM to at least 8 GB. Two good sources of third-party RAM (Apple overprices RAM) are Crucial and OWC http://eshop.macsales.com/.
HTH
-Allen Wicks

Similar Messages

Aperture 3 Performance Issues

Having real issues with Aperture 3.2.2. It is getting incredibly painful to use! General use is VERY slow and the longer I work with it the slower it gets even if it is the only application open. I just wondered if there was a reliable step by step guide in improving Aperture's performance?
The background stuff:
Aperture 3.2.2.
Mac OS X Mountain Lion 10.8.1
MacBook Pro 2.8GHz dual core
4Gb RAM
750Gb HD (1/2 empty) Library is stored on internal drive.
25,000 library with all masters stored in Aperture library (library is as old as Aperture 1.0 and has under gone several upgrades with new versions but never a rebuild).
Majority of images are 8MP Canon RAWs but am starting to work with 18MP Canon RAWs after a camera upgrade.
Even contemplating jumping ship to Lightroom, but I like Aperture workflow and tools and I'm guessing my biggest issue is the size of my library.
I have read various things on here about rebuidling libraries, or using seperate libraries by year to reduce library size. I don't want to invest a load of time for minimal results. I also appreciate my machine would benefit from a RAM upgrade, but not wholly convinced this will fix my issues?
Appreciate any advice.

Slowness like what you describe indicates a problem.
Is Aperture processing in the background? This shows at "Window➞Show Activity".
8 GB RAM recommended anyway. Check page outs if you want to see for yourself.
Splitting Library will have no major effect: Aperture uses memory well. Library size is mostly immaterial except as relates to drive size. (You have ample free space.)
Repair/Rebuild recommended. I do this regularly for all my Libraries. Of course, you shouldn't even open Aperture without having backups of your Libraries and Referenced Originals. Do this overnight -- it is also good to let Aperture run unmolested for a few hours, which it should have time to do after the Repair/Rebuild is complete. (Since your Library seems intact, "Repair" should be enough -- don't have to "Rebuild" yet.)
You may have additional "bottlenecks". Things to check:
- Does Aperture run faster/smoother under another user account? If so, delete your Aperture Prefs.
- Does Aperture run faster/smoother with another Library? If so, look for corrupt Images in your Library.
Repair, Rebuild, and Prefs deletion are covered on the Apple Aperture trouble-shooting page.
Good Luck -- let us know what you find out.
Message was edited by: Kirby Krieger -- Q "Show Activity" added.

Mountain lion performance issues

After installing 10.8 I am experiencing performance issues...is there anything that needs to be done to my macbook pro to improve usability?
Tom

First post in the Mountain Lion forum. Second include some detailed information about your "issue."

Mac OS X Lion and Java7 + JavaFX2.1 performance issues

Currently I'm using the JavaFX 2.1 GA Build with Mac OS X Lion (10.7.3) on my MacBook Pro (2.33 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 4GB 667 MHz DDR2 SDRAM, ATI Radeon X1600 256 MB) an run into some performance and ui problems. The overall rendering framerate is arround ~30fps (which is normally 60fps on my desktop computer) and if I try to resize the main window the window starts to flicker and I get the following exception:
Glass detected outstanding Java exception at -[GlassRunnable run]:src/com/sun/mat/ui/GlassApplication.m:163
Exception in thread "AWT-AppKit" java.lang.NullPointerException
at com.sun.glass.ui.mac.MacView._uploadPixels(MacView.java:72)
at com.sun.glass.ui.View.uploadPixels(View.java:706)
at com.sun.prism.j2d.J2DPresentable$Glass$1.run(J2DPresentable.java:99)So, how can I avoid the flickering and the performance drop? Any suggestions?

2.1 system requirements =>
http://docs.oracle.com/javafx/2/system_requirements_2-1/jfxpub-system_requirements_2-1.htm
For JavaFX applications to take advantage of the new hardware acceleration pipeline provided by JavaFX, your system must feature one of a wide range of GPUs currently available in the market. Table 1 lists the graphics cards that have been tested with JavaFX. If your system does not support hardware acceleration, then JavaFX uses the Java2D software pipeline.
For Mac OS X, the following standard Apple hardware graphics chips provide the required support:
- Intel HD Graphics 3000 processor with 288MB of DDR3 SDRAM shared with main memory
- AMD Radeon HD 6630M graphics processor with 256MB of GDDR5 memoryYour graphics card is not on that list, so JavaFX is falling back to a software pipeline, which does not work that well for you. You may not be able to resolve some performance issues when using a software pipline. You can log an issue at http://javafx-jira.kenai.com to request the NullPointerException be fixed - as that should not occur in any case and is a bug.

Aperture performance issues.

Dear members:
After some disappointments with the latest version of Bridge (CS3) I decided to start working with Aperture as I found it offered some interesting tools for viewing and selecting images.
First I worked on some test images and everything went well. However, last night I did my first import of "real world" images and experienced severe performance issues.
I imported one folder containing 163 photos to two different locations - the folder and the images were the same but imported into two separate locations in Aperture as I was trying to create the ideal file structure for me.
These are the questions and/or problems I have.
1. This IS NOT a major problem. As much as I tried to import photos into an album or folder I couldn't do it. I don't like the project concept and prefer to have my images placed into folders or albums. My iPhoto library was imported by Aperture using this structure. The iPhoto library is a folder with albums as subdivisions as they were set up in iPhoto originally. However, this doesn't seem to be working as I import photos from other locations.
Q: How can I import photos into folders or albums and completely avoid the projects concept and icons ?
2. This IS major problem. Performance was very poor. I imported the folders last night and waited for approximately 30 min until I decided to turn my computer off. Aperture gave me a message stating that it was still generating previews and asking me if I wanted to quit. I pressed the OK button and turned the computer off. This morning I launced Aperture again and it went back to the spinning wheel on both projects. It must have taken approximately 45 min until the spinning wheels were no longer turning.
This is a problem for me as I have a library with approximately 15,000 - 20,000 images. The ones I imported last night were CR2 generated by a Canon 1Ds MK II (17 MB each). I can only imagine how long it would have taken had I chosen to import the 120+ MB TIFF images I also have in my library from slide scans.
My Aperture preferences have been set for Preview Quality = 12 and Limit Preview Size = Don't Limit. I have it set this way as I don't with to have reduced size previews so that (1) they can display with the highest possible quality as I mostly use the full screen mode for viewing and selecting images, and (2) in case I upgrade to a larger monitor in the near future (I have a 23" cinema display but am planning to upgrade to a 30") the previews will still work with that monitor.
Is this performace typical of Aperture ? I understand my camera is a professional camera that generates large images but isn't Aperture supposed to be a professional application aimed at professional photographers ? And what about those who work with 39 MB images from a Hasselblad or with scanned 120+ MB slide images ?
Is there something obvious I have forgotten to look at or set up in Aperture ?
Thank you in advance,
Joseph Chamberlain

Steve:
Thank you very much for your reply to my post and for your suggestions. Some comments about my experience appear below. I am grateful for your help and don't wish in any way to discuss what you recommend below. I just wish to share my view of this issue and also to try to find the best answers for my problem.
For 1, use File > Import > Folders Into A Project. That will retain your folder
structure using brown folders and albums.
See:
http://www.bagelturf.com/aparticles/library/fivesimple/index.html and
http://www.bagelturf.com/aparticles/library/brown/index.html and
http://www.bagelturf.com/aparticles/library/libinadv/index.html
A. You can't. Projects are the container for everything in Aperture. No
projects, no images. So just live with them and subnvert them any way you
like. I don't have "projects" so I just use months, vacations, events, or
whatever keeps my image collections a reasonable size.
As an user I would like to have control over my own filing structure. This works quite well in iPhoto and I don't understand why Aperture chose to adopt this less flexible file structure. Also I noticed that the imported iPhoto library appears in Aperture inside a folder with multiple albums. Since Aperture can do this for iPhoto I find it hard to understand why it can't do for other imported images.
2. Turn off previews and delete the ones you have. When you find you need > them, use them selectively:
http://www.bagelturf.com/aparticles/previews/pwho/index.html
As stated in my previous post I always (no exception) use the full screen mode for viewing my images which is similar to a slide show. So according to the web page you reference above I would fall under the category of users that need previews.
You don't need high res previews. Aperture already generates thumbnails
for you.
General speed tips:
* Get the best video card with the most RAM you can afford
I can't. My computer is fairly new as it was purchased a little more than 2 years ago. Although it is a fairly new computer Apple no longer offers parts for it. My video card is an ATI Radeon 9600 Pro with 64 MB of VRAM installed. I have contacted Apple about this issue and they tell me there is nothing they can do. I have also contacted both ATI Radeon and nVidia and both have discontinued the only two cards they would work in my system (X800 XT Mac Edition and GeForce 6800, respectively).
* Smaller screens are faster than larger screens
My screen is 23" which I would consider to be a medium size screen by today's standards. However, isn't the purpose of working with Aperture to be able to develop a professional workflow ? And don't most professionals like to use large screens to view their work ?
* Avoid H&S adjustments until all the others are done
* Make sure you have sufficient RAM (2G minimum, 3G on a Mac Pro)
My system has 2.5 GB RAM installed. It has been suggested to me that I should add another 1 or 2 GB RAM as it would improve performance significantly. I have no problem doing that and would welcome that solution if I knew for a fact it was going to address my issues. However, I have already invested too much on hardware and software while still finding myself struggling with the issues I have described. Do you think the additional RAM would solve the problem ?
* Don't use previews unless you need them
Based on what I have read on the pages you referenced it seems to me I am one of those users who needs previews.
* Keep projects small. Use blue folders to group projects
My current filing structure is simple - I four folders each with subfolders containing in average 200 to 1000 images each. Some have as little as 1 image and some have 1000. But the majority would fall in the 300 to 400 images range.
* Rebuild the database once in a while
* Quit other apps if memory is restrictive
It seems in this case that the RAM upgrade I mention above would be helpful. Would it allow me to run other applications while also running Aperture without any noticeable performance alteration ?
To a great extent you have to rethink your workflow once you use Aperture.
Many people do a lot of unnecessary things because they are coming from
an environment that forced them to. Start from scratch and ask yourself
why you do everything you do. Much of the effort you will find is wasted
because Aperture either does it for you or make it unnecessary.
I am trying to simply my workflow as much as I can but not at the expense of quality. Bridge CS2 did a very good job for me. In many ways it was the perfect application althout it didn't have many of the great features I find in Aperture for reviewing and selecting images. First it was simple - all you had to do was to create your own file structure and then point Bridge to the folders as it would create its own previews. Second it was fast - this process happened a lot faster compared to Aperture and Bridge CS3. Third it was high quality - the previews generated were high quality and could be seen with amazing resolution while in slide show viewing mode on my 23" screen. My upgrade to Bridge CS3 was disastrous as (1) it has many bugs Adobe hasn't taken the time to fix, (2) it is slow on average machines requiring the latest hardware to run efficiently which is unrealistic for most consumers and (3) the previews generated are soft and appear pixilated and in poor quality while in slide show view.
I am going back to Aperture after a very disappointing start as I was one of the very first to purchase the software as soon as it was introduced only to be frustrated with all of its bugs and design flaws. Aperture has one of the best interfaces I have seen on any imaging application and I would really like to use but after this new attempt to use and the barriers I have encountered I am not sure I can.
Joseph Chamberlain

Outlook performance issues with mountain lion

I have latest updates for Mountain Lion (10.8.2) and Outlook (14.2.5). I continue to have outlook performance issues where the ball just spins and rules aren't working as before. I tried disk doctor and still have same problem.s My MAC is less than a year old with 8 gig of memory. Some performance issues with fusion and safari too but nothing like outlook.

I am not sure if this is still an issue but I wanted to share that it has been resolved. Here is how to do it
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/4197578?start=30&tstart=0

Lightroom 4 performance issues

Hello,
Months ago I switched from Aperture 3 to Lightroom 3 and quickly fell in love with the program.
I switched due to constant freezing and crashes in Aperture 3. I invested time and money to learn Lightroom 3. Performance in Lightroom 3 was superb. Anything I would do with regards to any type of adjustment gave instant results on the screen. Program never crashed or froze onec. Quite frankly, I was shocked in a very positive way.
This was on Macbook Pro i5, 8GB RAM, Hi Res Antiglare screen with Snow Leopard.
I purchased Lightroom 4. I did a clean install of OSX Lion and, clean install of LR4. New catalogs, no importing of anything. LR 4 is sooo slow. It works just like Aperture 3 worked, the precise reason that made me dump it.
The longer LR4 is opened, the slower it becomes. The more adjustments are applied, the slower it becomes. I will use brush and I have to wait to see results. I can't use brush. It takes me 15-30 min to brush small part of the image. I will slide adjustments and wait. I will click on crop tool and wait, wait, wait. I really love this program but I just can't work like that.
Would anyone share some light or advice on what could be done, on what is going on?
Thank you.

Rob,
I am working with NEF files and have done so in LR3. I understand from some reading that one of the benefits from converting files to DNG is that they are faster to work with. So I just copied one of my NEF as DNG and I have been working on it for about 15 minutes applying brush after brush and other adjustments to see if LR4 will slow down. Thus far it has been incredibly faster. I will continue to work on this one image and maybe convert few more to DNG to test but do you think that there might be some issue with NEF format? Another bizzare thing I just noticed is that when I open NEF image, my memory quickly goes up to over 3GB and that's not even during applying adjustments. Working now with DNG, memory is just around 1.3 GB. WHAT IS GOING ON HERE???
I wonder what type of files are other LR4 users that are reporing performance issues working with.
Please share your thoughts.
Thank you.

Aperture 3 Performance is Unbelievably Slow

My library is not huge (~9000 images), but Aperture 3 performance is ridiculously slow. My library resides on an external drive (a Mercury On-The-Go High Speed Portable SATA Solution unit). No other apps are open. I have 2GB RAM. I have turned off the faces feature, thinking that might help. No dice. The software is unusable at this performance level. Any ideas? Thanks.

I have been flamed (OK, toasted a bit)for suggesting that:
-- Defragging the Aperture Library is necessary at all or helpful if done,
-- Simple copy out/copy back is not enough.
But this is precisely what I have seen. OSX does an incredible job of keeping disks A) optimised and B) largely defragged. The Aperture Library appears to be a huge exception. I suspect that this may be an artifact of the "Package" concept. It is clear that in many cases a Package is intended to look like one single file. I wonder if this keeps all of the internal files from being reorganized when copied. I hasten to add that I am way over my depth here.
I can confirm that:
-- Deleting the cache and prefs files seems to fix the major speed problems.
-- The various preview, index, and related files can become fragmented into hundreds of fragments. Master image files are typically not more than four fragments. Obviously, the faster your disk, the less this is an issue, but for those of us who are running a plane Jane mini with a slow drive, a RAID 0 is not an option.
-- As noted by many, iDefrag's "Quick On-Line" mode cleans this up in mere minutes. (Fewer minutes the second time.) And, as a side benefit, it cleans up the various Private and Spotlite files that may have become fragmented. All of this WITHOUT attempting a major reordering of the disk. (Probably just as well, because, as noted repeatedly, OSX does an excellent job of optimization.
In any case, the happy coincidence of all of this and the multiple udates from Apple is that Aperture 3 absolutely roars. I still keep my stuff backed up in three copies, but crashes, hangs, etc., have never been a problem and all of the brushes and sliders are much more responsive, on 100 MB TIFF images at full resolution, than Apeture 2 ever was.

10.7.4 huge photoshop performance issues

I've had variants of three different versions of Photoshop installed - CS4, 5 and now 6. I'm not 100% sure when the issue
started occurring, but I've done a lot of experimentation to analyze it.
The components involved are
1.Photoshop
2.Wacom Intuos 3
3.Lion 10.7.4
Whenever I'm digital painting, which I'm doing professionally, all the time, the colour picking mechanism is not only slow, but doesn't work about 2/3 of the
time. The next stroke made *after* the colour picking never works either. I do this about ONCE EVERY TWO SECONDS. So it's like being punched
in the face all day long while you're trying to get some work done.
Most likely, support staff will attempt to get rid of me saying 'ask wacom' or 'ask adobe.' BUT, here's the process I've gone through.
1.Tried all three variants of photoshop. They all have issues.
2.Switched to a different Wacom tablet (identical model), switched three different wacom pens, all identical models. Note that I also
tested all of these on a Windows machine with the same Photoshop issue, and they all work. And I also tested them all, and photoshop,
on my old intel powerbook running the same version of Photoshop, and it's fine. That Mac is running Leopard.
3.I erased my HD, reinstalled Lion (10.7.4 obviously) and installed Photoshop and the Wacom drivers on top of it again. Just one version,
nothing else to mess with it. Aaaaand, exactly the same issue.
This has made my Mac unusable and frankly, is having a massive financial impact on me . If anyone can think of anything I've left out, please
give it a shot. My instinct is that this has narrowed it down to the operating system, and that it's most likely something to do with the GPU. Or the USB bus. Or the application support libraries - but specific to this hardware as, like i say, I've tried another mac with leopard and all is fine.
HEEEEELP!

I am having serious Photoshop performance issues as well.
My Photoshop CS5 was running well until I upgraded to Mac OS 10.7.4. My observations are highly un-scientific, but I am noticing the worst performance in Photoshop when I have my Firefox browser open. It's like the 2 programs are fighting with each other. I am also noticing Flash crash reports on Firefox when Photoshop is open.
Even with Firefox closed, however, Photoshop CS5 is sluggish and slow with 10.7.4. Even the dreaded beachball coming back into my life.
I have even erased my hardrive and reinstalled the OS and that did not help.
Other programs are running fine. Even Firefox runs well when photoshop is not running.

Recent ML upgrade leads to widespread video performance issues.

Hello,
I recently took the leap to Mountain Lion and I'm starting to regret my decision. I have noticed a real drop off in video performance across the entire system.
Firstly, I came across a well documented issue with Final Cut Pro 7 video playback in the canvas. Playback is almost unusable due to introduced artifacts and tearing. However the video performance issues seem more wide spread than "unsupported software". I notice extremely rough image switching when I switch between workspaces, particularly on the second monitor. Also, when the screen saver kicks in and it swaps images, the same very klunky image swap is noticed on the second monitor. Also when the Reading List display is toggled in Safari, the remaining window slide left or right is not smooth at all, irrespective of what monitor it is on. There are other Safari rendering issues too, involving flickers, and other general video issues.
My machine is a mid-2010 Mac Pro, 6 core, 3.3GHz with 24GB of RAM and a 5870 graphics card. None of these issues were present in Lion.
I was wondering whether anyone else had noticed similar issues and if so, what if anything can be done about it.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Scott

This problem is not restricted to Leopard, 10.4.10 with QuickTime 7.3 is affected too. 10.4.11 doesn't show any improvements either. Yes, we need a fix for this... but one that solves this problem on Tiger as well, please.

Report Performance Issue - Activity

Hi gurus,
I'm developing an Activity report using Transactional database (Online real time object).
the purpose of the report is to list down all contacts related activities and activities NOT related to Contact by activity owner (user id).
In order to fullfill that requirment I've created 2 report
1) All Activities related to Contact -- Report A
pull in Acitivity ID , Activity Type, Status, Contact ID
2) All Activities not related to Contact UNION All Activities related to Contact (Base report) -- Report B
to get the list of activities not related to contact i'm using Advanced filter based on result of another request which is I think is the part that slow down the query.
<Activity ID not equal to any Activity ID in Report B>
Anyone encountered performance issue due to the advanced filter in analytic before?
any input is really appriciated
Thanks in advanced,
Fina

Fina,
Union is always the last option. If you can get all record in one report, do not use union.
since all records, which you are targeting, are in the activity subject area, it is not nessecery to combine reports. add a column with the following logic
if contact id is null (or = 'Unspecified') then owner name else contact name
Hopefully, this is helping.

Report performance Issue in BI Answers

Hi All,
We have a performance issues with reports. Report is running more than 10 mins. we took query from the session log and ran it in database, at that time it took not more than 2 mins. We have verified proper indexes on the where clause columns.
Could any once suggest to improve the performance in BI answers?
Thanks in advance,

I hope you dont have many case statements and complex calculations that you do in the Answers.
Next thing you need to monitor is how many rows of data that you are trying to retrieve from the query. If the volume is huge then it takes time to do the formatting on the Answers as you are going to dump huge volumes of data. Database(like teradata) returns initially like 1-2000 records if you hit show all records then even db is gonna fair amount of time if you are dumping many records
hope it helps
thanks
Prash

BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Hi Masters,
I am working out for a solution for BW report developed in 0bcs_vc10 virtual cube.
Some of the querys is taking more 15 to 20 minutes to execute the report.
This is huge performance issue. We are using BW 3.5, and report devloped in bex and published thru portal. Any one faced similar problem please advise how you tackle this issue. Please give the detail analysis approach how you resolved this issue.
Current service pack we are using is
SAP_BW 350 0016 SAPKW35016
FINBASIS 300 0012 SAPK-30012INFINBASIS
BI_CONT 353 0008 SAPKIBIFP8
SEM-BW 400 0012 SAPKGS4012
Best of Luck
Chris
BW BCS cube(0bcs_vc10 ) Report huge performance issue

Ravi,
I already did that, it is not helping me much for the performance. Reports are taking 15 t0 20 minutes. I wanted any body in this forum have the same issue how
they resolved it.
Regards,
Chris

Interested by performance issue ? Read this ! If you can explain, you're a master Jedi !

This is the question we will try to answer...
What si the bottle neck (hardware) of Adobe Premiere Pro CS6
I used PPBM5 as a benchmark testing template.
All the data and log as been collected using performance counter
First of all, describe my computer...
Operating System
Microsoft Windows 8 Pro 64-bit
CPU
Intel Xeon E5 2687W @ 3.10GHz
Sandy Bridge-EP/EX 32nm Technology
RAM
Corsair Dominator Platinum 64.0 GB DDR3
Motherboard
EVGA Corporation Classified SR-X
Graphics
PNY Nvidia Quadro 6000
EVGA Nvidia GTX 680 // Yes, I created bench stats for both card
Hard Drives
16.0GB Romex RAMDISK (RAID)
556GB LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed (RAID 0)
I have other RAID installed, but not relevant for the present post...
PSU
Cosair 1000 Watts
After many days of tests, I wanna share my results with community and comment them.
CPU Introduction
I tested my cpu and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit, can I reach this limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 1).
Intro : I tested my E5-XEON 2687W (8 Cores Hyperthread - 16 threads) to know if programs can use the maximum of it. I used Prime 95 to get the result. // I know this seem to be ordinary, but you will understand soon...
The result : Yes, I can get 100% of my CPU with 1 program using 20 threads in parallel. The CPU gives everything it can !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test...
(picture 1)
Disk Introduction
I tested my disk and pushed it at maximum speed to understand where is the limit and I've logged precisely all result in graph (See pictures 2).
Intro : I tested my RAID 0 556GB (LSI MegaRAID 9260-8i SATA3 6GB/s 5 disks with Fastpath Chip Installed) to know if I can reach the maximum % disk usage (0% idle Time)
The result : As you can see in picture 2, yes, I can get the max of my drive at ~ 1.2 Gb/sec read/write steady !
Comment : I put 3 IO (cpu, disk, ram) on the graph of my computer during the test to see the impact of transfering many Go of data during ~10 sec...
(picture 2)
Now, I know my limits ! It's time to enter deeper in the subject !
PPBM5 (H.264) Result
I rendered the sequence (H.264) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%, the turn around 50%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate seem to be a wave (up and down). Probably caused by (Encrypt time.... write.... Encrypt time.... write...) // It's ok, ~5Mb/sec during transfert rate !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 39 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~65 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card seem to be a wave also ! (up and down) ~40% usage of GPU during the process of encoding.
GPU Ram get 1.2Go of RAM (But with GTX 680, no problem and Quadro 6000 with 6 GB RAM, no problem !)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (50%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (60%), RAM is free (62%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result !
(picture 3)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (RAID LSI)
I rendered the sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder on my RAID 0 LSI disk.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk wave and wave again, but far far from the limit !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Buffering time.... write.... Buffering time.... write...) // It's ok, ~375Mb/sec peak during transfert rate ! Easy !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40.5 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~48 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Good, thread is the sign that program try to using many cores !)
GPU Load on card = 0 (This kind of encoding is GPU irrelevant)
GPU Ram get 400Mb of RAM (No usage for encoding)
Comment/Question : CPU is free (65%), disks are free (60%), GPU is free (100%), RAM is free (63%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Is there some time delay in the encoding process ?
(picture 4)
PPBM5 (Disk Test) Result (Direct in RAMDrive)
I rendered the same sequence (Disk Test) using Adobe Media Encoder directly in my RamDrive
Comment/Question : Look at the transfert rate under (picture 5). It's exactly the same speed than with my RAID 0 LSI controller. Impossible ! Look in the same picture the transfert rate I can reach with the ramdrive (> 3.0 Gb/sec steady) and I don't go under 30% of disk usage. CPU is idle (70%), Disk is idle (100%), GPU is idle (100%) and RAM is free (63%). // This kind of results let me REALLY confused. It's smell bug and big problem with hardware and IO usage in CS6 !
(picture 5)
PPBM5 (MPEG-DVD) Result
I rendered the sequence (MPEG-DVD) using Adobe Media Encoder.
The result :
My CPU is not used at 100%
My Disk is totally idle !
All the process usage are idle except process of (Adobe Media Encoder)
The transfert rate wave and wave again (up and down). Probably caused by (Encoding time.... write.... Encoding time.... write...) // It's ok, ~2Mb/sec during transfert rate ! Real Joke !
CPU Power management give 100% of clock to CPU during the encoding process (it's ok, the clock is stable during process).
RAM, more than enough ! 40 Go RAM free after the test ! // Excellent
~80 thread opened by Adobe Media Encoder (Lot of thread, but it's ok in multi-thread apps!)
GPU Load on card = 100 (This use the maximum of my GPU)
GPU Ram get 1Gb of RAM
Comment/Question : CPU is free (70%), disks are free (98%), GPU is loaded (MAX), RAM is free (63%), my computer is pushed at limit during the encoding process for GPU only. Now, for this kind of encoding, the speed limit is affected by the slower IO (Video Card GPU)
Other : Quadro 6000 is slower than GTX 680 for this kind of encoding (~20 s slower than GTX).
(picture 6)
Encoding single clip FULL HD AVCHD to H.264 Result (Premiere Pro CS6)
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment/Question : CPU is free (55%), disks are free (99%), GPU is free (90%), RAM is free (65%), my computer is not pushed at limit during the encoding process. Why ???? Adobe Premiere seem to have some bug with thread management. My hardware is idle ! I understand AVCHD can be very difficult to decode, but where is the waste ? My computer want, but the software not !
(picture 7)
Render composition using 3D Raytracer in After Effects CS6
You can look the result in the picture.
Comment : GPU seems to be the bottle neck when using After Effects. CPU is free (99%), Disks are free (98%), Memory is free (60%) and it depend of the setting and type of project.
Other : Quadro 6000 & GTX 680 gives the same result in time for rendering the composition.
(picture 8)
Conclusion
There is nothing you can do (I thing) with CS6 to get better performance actually. GTX 680 is the best (Consumer grade card) and the Quadro 6000 is the best (Profressional card). Both of card give really similar result (I will probably return my GTX 680 since I not really get any better performance). I not used Tesla card with my Quadro, but actually, both, Premiere Pro & After Effects doesn't use multi GPU. I tried to used both card together (GTX & Quadro), but After Effects gives priority to the slower card (In this case, the GTX 680)
Premiere Pro, I'm speechless ! Premiere Pro is not able to get max performance of my computer. Not just 10% or 20%, but average 60%. I'm a programmor, multi-threadling apps are difficult to manage and I can understand Adobe's programmor. But actually, if anybody have comment about this post, tricks or any kind of solution, you can comment this post. It's seem to be a bug...
Thank you.

Patrick,
I can't explain everything, but let me give you some background as I understand it.
The first issue is that CS6 has a far less efficient internal buffering or caching system than CS5/5.5. That is why the MPEG encoding in CS6 is roughly 2-3 times slower than the same test with CS5. There is some 'under-the-hood' processing going on that causes this significant performance loss.
The second issue is that AME does not handle regular memory and inter-process memory very well. I have described this here: Latest News
As to your test results, there are some other noteworthy things to mention. 3D Ray tracing in AE is not very good in using all CUDA cores. In fact it is lousy, it only uses very few cores and the threading is pretty bad and does not use the video card's capabilities effectively. Whether that is a driver issue with nVidia or an Adobe issue, I don't know, but whichever way you turn it, the end result is disappointing.
The overhead AME carries in our tests is something we are looking into and the next test will only use direct export and no longer the AME queue, to avoid some of the problems you saw. That entails other problems for us, since we lose the capability to check encoding logs, but a solution is in the works.
You see very low GPU usage during the H.264 test, since there are only very few accelerated parts in the timeline, in contrast to the MPEG2-DVD test, where there is rescaling going on and that is CUDA accelerated. The disk I/O test suffers from the problems mentioned above and is the reason that my own Disk I/O results are only 33 seconds with the current test, but when I extend the duration of that timeline to 3 hours, the direct export method gives me 22 seconds, although the amount of data to be written, 37,092 MB has increased threefold. An effective write speed of 1,686 MB/s.
There are a number of performance issues with CS6 that Adobe is aware of, but whether they can be solved and in what time, I haven't the faintest idea.
Just my $ 0.02

Performance Issue for BI system

Hello,
We are facing performance issues for BI System. Its a preproductive system and its performance is degrading badly everyday. I was checking system came to know program buffer hit ratio is increaasing everyday due to high Swaps. So asked to change the parameter abap/buffersize which was 300Mb to 500Mb. But still no major improvement is found in the system.
There is 16GB Ram available and Server is HP-UX and with Netweaver2004s with Oracle 10.2.0.4.0 installed in it.
The Main problem is while running a report or creating a query is taking way too long time.
Kindly help me.

Hello SIva,
Thanks for your reply but i have checked ST02 and ST03 and also SM50 and its normal
we are having 9 dialog processes, 3 Background , 2 Update and 1 spool.
No one is using the system currently but in ST02 i can see the swaps are in red.
Buffer                 HitRatio   % Alloc. KB Freesp. KB   % Free Sp.   Dir. Size FreeDirEnt   % Free Dir    Swaps    DB Accs
Nametab (NTAB)                                                                                0
   Table definition     99,60     6.798                                                   20.000                                            29.532    153.221
   Field definition     99,82      31.562        784                 2,61           20.000      6.222          31,11          17.246     41.248
   Short NTAB           99,94     3.625      2.446                81,53          5.000        2.801          56,02             0            2.254
   Initial records      73,95        6.625        998                 16,63          5.000        690             13,80             40.069     49.528
                                                                                0
boldprogram                97,66     300.000     1.074                 0,38           75.000     67.177        89,57           219.665    725.703bold
CUA                    99,75         3.000        875                   36,29          1.500      1.401          93,40            55.277      2.497
Screen                 99,80         4.297      1.365                 33,35          2.000      1.811          90,55              119         3.214
Calendar              100,00       488            361                  75,52            200         42              21,00               0            158
OTR                   100,00         4.096      3.313                  100,00        2.000      2.000          100,00              0
                                                                                0
Tables                                                                                0
   Generic Key          99,17    29.297      1.450                  5,23           5.000        350             7,00             2.219      3.085.633
   Single record        99,43    10.000      1.907                  19,41           500         344            68,80              39          467.978
                                                                                0
Export/import          82,75     4.096         43                      1,30            2.000        662          33,10            137.208
Exp./ Imp. SHM         89,83     4.096        438                    13,22         2.000      1.482          74,10               0
SAP Memory      Curr.Use %    CurUse[KB]    MaxUse[KB]    In Mem[KB]    OnDisk[KB]    SAPCurCach      HitRatio %
Roll area               2,22                5.832               22.856             131.072     131.072                   IDs           96,61
Page area              1,08              2.832                24.144               65.536    196.608              Statement     79,00
Extended memory     22,90       958.464           1.929.216          4.186.112          0                                         0,00
Heap memory                                    0                  0                    1.473.767          0                                         0,00
Call Stati             HitRatio %     ABAP/4 Req      ABAP Fails     DBTotCalls         AvTime[ms]      DBRowsAff.
Select single     88,59               63.073.369        5.817.659      4.322.263             0                         57.255.710
Select               72,68               284.080.387          0               13.718.442             0                        32.199.124
Insert                 0,00                  151.955             5.458             166.159               0                           323.725
Update               0,00                    378.161           97.884           395.814               0                            486.880
Delete                 0,00                    389.398          332.619          415.562              0                             244.495
Edited by: Srikanth Sunkara on May 12, 2011 11:50 AM

Aperture & Lion performance issues

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for