Puget Systems print logo

https://www.pugetsystems.com

Read this article at https://www.pugetsystems.com/guides/907
Article Thumbnail

Adobe Photoshop CC 2017 AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X Performance

Written on March 2, 2017 by Matt Bach
Share:

Introduction

Whenever a new generation of CPUs is launched, the main question everyone wants answered is how fast they are. In the case of AMD's Ryzen, there are also a lot of questions surrounding how they compare to the processors available from Intel. For quite a while now Intel has held a dominant position in nearly every computing market, but there is a lot of hype around Ryzen due to the fact that you can get eight CPU cores for half the cost of an Intel processor of the same size.

In this article, we will be looking at how the new AMD Ryzen 7 1700X and 1800X perform in Photoshop compared to Intel's top 4, 6, and 8 core CPUs.

Update 3/8/2017: Added benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen 7 1800X (results in original article were placeholders)
Update 3/13/2017: Ryzen HDR merge results updated. The original "5x 18MP" HDR results were really odd. We found that in this test we had to run it many more times to get decent results as the time it took to create an HDR image varied wildly from run to run.

If you want to skip over our individual benchmark results and go straight to the conclusion, feel free to jump ahead! We also have a number of other articles looking at the performance of the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X & 1800X CPUs in other applications including:

Test Setup

To see how the new Ryzen CPUs perform in Photoshop, we used the following configurations:

These test configurations include three different platforms along with five CPU models. For Photoshop, we would typically recommend a quad core CPU with a high frequency since Photoshop is mostly single or lightly threaded, but since the 1700X and 1800X have eight cores we also included two of Intel's "High End" Core i7 CPUs with 6-8 cores.

The images we used in our testing (and their source) are:

Photoshop Actions
 

360MP (21500x16718)
Scaled up from the Hardware Heaven Photoshop Benchmark V3 (no longer available)

Resized to 38MP (7000x5443) for Smart Blur

Merge to HDR
 

5x 18MP TIFF (5184x3456)

Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T3i

5x 80MP TIFF (7760x10328)

Camera: Phase One IQ180
Courtesy of Mark McGilvray Photography

Settings: Default

Photomerge
 

6x 18MP TIFF (5184x3456)
Merged to 98MP (26144x3759)

Camera: Canon EOS REBEL T3i

6x 80MP TIFF (7760x10328)
Merged to 177MP (18552x9552)

Camera: Phase One IQ180
Courtesy of Mark McGilvray Photography

Settings: Auto Layout. Blend, vignette removal, geometric distortion correction, and content aware fill enabled.

Photoshop Action Results

  AMD Ryzen 7 1700X AMD Ryzen 7 1800X Intel Core i7 7700K Intel Core i7 6850K Intel Core i7 6900K
General Photoshop Actions          
Time to Launch Photoshop 2.1 2.1 1.4 2 1.9
Time to Open 1.17GB PSD 6.3 6.1 5.1 6.3 5.7
Time to Save 1.17GB PSD 21.2 20.1 15.8 18.1 20.4
Convert to CMYK 2.6 2.4 2.6 2.4 2.3
Convert to RGB 3.1 2.9 4 3.3 2.8
Rotate 38deg 4.5 4.3 3.6 4.1 3.9
Smart Sharpen 4.4 4.4 4.3 4.6 4.7
Field Blur 32.1 31.3 25.1 28.3 28
Iris Blur 34.6 33.6 28.4 30.8 29.9
Tilt-Shift 34.9 34.2 28 30.7 29.9
Lighting Effect 11.3 11.2 8.6 9.8 9.8
Motion Blur 6.1 5.9 4.9 6.5 6.4
Water Color 66.6 65.3 44.1 57.1 57.4
Pallette Knife 83.1 81.7 65.2 75.8 76
Stained Glass 108.9 106.7 135.6 133.6 133.3
Liquify 23.5 23.3 16.1 20.2 19.9
Reduce Noise 51.3 49.7 51 62.9 61.4
Camera Raw Filter 13.4 13.2 12.9 12.2 10.8
Generate Normal Map 13.4 13 9.8 13.9 13.3
Lens Correction 44 42.8 35 48.2 46.1
Adaptive Wide Angle 244.8 238.5 147 254 290.5
Resize to 109MB 9.2 8.9 6.7 9.6 8.8
Smart Blur 23.6 23.6 20.6 25.5 24.5
Photomerge          
6x 18MP Images 66.6 65.2 60.7 64.6 62
6x 80MP Images 275.9 274.2 242.9 260.3 245.2
HDR Creation          
5x 18MP Images 28.2 29.8 30.5 25.4 28.6
5x 80MP Images 75.1 73.8 55.6 64.5 67.2

Normally we would spend quite a bit of time going through the results action by action, but the performance across each task is remarkably consistent. The only thing we want to note is that the results for HDR creation was a bit odd with the Ryzen CPUs. With the Intel CPUs, we had some normal variation between runs (we usually run each test about 3 times and take the fastest result), but Ryzen was all over the place for that test. We still took the minimum (since we are concerned about maximum performance), but it is worth pointing out that we ended up running the "5x 18MP" HDR creation test about 10 times because the results varied from just under 30 seconds to over 60 seconds.

Conclusion

Photoshop CC 2017 AMD Ryzen 7 1700x 1800x Benchmark Performance

If we normalize all our results to the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X, you get a great idea of how these new AMD CPUs compare to Intel's offerings. To make it short: Ryzen isn't all that great for Photoshop.

Most tasks in Photoshop are lightly threaded (they don't take great advantage of multiple CPU cores) so it is true that the eight cores on the 1700X and 1800X can't be used to their full advantage. However, even if we only compare the Ryzen CPUs to the six and eight core Intel CPUs they at best match Intel for general actions in Photoshop and are a decent amount slower for photomerge. Looking at creating HDR photos, the Intel's 6-8 core CPUs are around 8-17% faster than the 1700X or about 4-13% faster than the 1800X.

Really, the true test for Ryzen is how it compares to the Intel Core i7 7700K since that is currently the best CPU available for Photoshop. Unfortunately, Ryzen simply can't keep up with the i7 7700K which is both cheaper and significantly faster. In general tasks and photomerge the i7 7700K is around 23% faster than Ryzen on average. Interestingly, the 1800X does pretty well when creating HDR photos, although it was still around 13% slower than the i7 7700K for that task.

Overall, if you are looking for a Photoshop workstation we would advise you to skip Ryzen and stick with the Intel Core i7 7700K. Not only is it more affordable and on a more established platform, but it should also be significantly faster for pretty much any task you might perform in Photoshop.

Photoshop Workstation

Tags: Adobe, Photoshop, CPU, Processor, Ryzen
Adrian

Hello guys! Thank you for testing :) I'm waiting for Premiere Pro tests (mainly wrap stabilizer & export times cause they are only things that I must wait for while working with clips).

Posted on 2017-03-03 10:55:24

Hey Adrian, just letting you know that we got our preliminary Premiere Pro testing with Ryzen up just a few minutes ago: https://www.pugetsystems.co.... Just like this article, the 1800X results are placeholder, but it should be pretty close to actual performance. Once we get in an 1800X we'll update the charts with actual results from that CPU.

Overall, Ryzen is a bit of a hard choice for Premiere - especially if you do a lot of warp stabilize. Intel has a pretty decent performance advantage there so the 6850K (or 6900K if you have the budget for it) is probably a better choice. I think it is close enough that if you are building your own PC and want to support AMD you would probably be happy enough with Ryzen but otherwise I would lean toward using Intel CPUs still.

Posted on 2017-03-04 00:46:13
danglingparticiple

How shocking, since all Puget sells are Intel-based systems.

Posted on 2017-06-05 20:49:40
Ondrej Hanel

yeah like warp stabilize is something people do mostly in premiere :D thats quite stupid argument since ryzen destroys intel in multuthreding

Posted on 2017-08-26 06:06:24

Make sure you are looking at our latest articles (this is currently the latest for Premiere Pro: https://www.pugetsystems.co... ). 6 months ago when I originally replied to Adrian it was a tough call between Ryzen and the Intel Core series but things have changed quite a bit with Skylake-X. For exporting and rendering previews the i7 7800X performs right between the 1700X and 1800X but it pulls way ahead when it comes to live playback performance and single threaded tasks like warp stabilize (or if you use Photoshop/After Effects/other lightly threaded applications). The cost of the i7 7800X and Ryzen 1800X is roughly on par when factoring in the higher cost of Intel X299 motherboards (depending on sales/deals of course) so the i7 7800X is a pretty clear choice over the Ryzen CPUs since it is within a few percent when exporting, but better for everything else.

For those who can afford another $200, however, the i7 7820X is much faster than either the i7 7800X or the Ryzen CPUs - roughly 15-20% faster when exporting and rendering previews. Live playback isn't much better than the i7 7800X, but even without a performance gain there it is still stronger than the Ryzen CPUs. So at this point I don't really see much argument for using Ryzen for Premiere Pro unless you simply want to support AMD (which is completely a valid reason to do so!). AMD has a great CPU in Threadripper though, and we hope to have a Premiere Pro article up looking at Threadripper performance in Premiere Pro early next week.

Posted on 2017-08-26 06:26:47
Papa Lazarou's Party Planner

Any chance of some Lightroom benchmarks? A couple of years ago you did look at Lightroom scaling and it'd nice to see how Zen fits in. I reckon it should benefit more than PS from extra cores but the question is if it's enough to outweighs the single thread bits (which I reckon the important element of interacting with the develop module is - sub-second pauses for it to catch up with slider tweaks is more a usability issues than going off to make a tea/coffee while it batch exports).

After my kitchen upgrade, I can finally retire my Athlon II X4 Lightroom rig which quite frankly provides an experience that is the wrong side of painful. It'll probably be a Intel of some sort unless it turns out Lightroom really likes those extra cores.

Posted on 2017-03-03 11:35:14

I'm still waiting to upgrade to something better than my Intel 2600K clocked at 4.7Ghz. Lightroom is where I spend most of my time, so hoping to see some excellent bench-marking here soon. :-) Much appreciated.

Posted on 2017-03-03 14:48:06

Just letting you know that we got our preliminary Lightroom testing with Ryzen up just a few minutes ago: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . Just like this article, the 1800X results are placeholder, but it should be pretty close to actual performance. Once we get in an 1800X we'll update the charts with actual results from that CPU.

Posted on 2017-03-03 23:55:25

Thank you for the tests!
HPET was enabled or disabled?

RyzenMaster and HPET can make your Ryzen computer run slower
http://www.pcworld.idg.com....

Posted on 2017-03-03 17:02:46

We didn't use the RyzenMaster software (we tend to avoid overclocking in our testing unless that is something we are specifically testing) and we didn't mess with the HPET settings so it should be disabled in all our testing.

Posted on 2017-03-03 23:01:08
fernando gonzalez

Windows 10 and SMT on or off since it broken on win 10.

Posted on 2017-03-09 17:29:11
Josh N

Would it be possible to add "video rendering using effects" like the new smart morphing or camera raw(using smart filters) from photoshop? i've been experimenting with these and notice they take a long long time on my current computer and would be interested to see how the newer processors handle these tasks.

or maybe some tasks in the 3d workspace?

Posted on 2017-03-04 03:04:41

To be honest, testing video rendering in Photoshop is something we've toyed with, but it seems like the number of people using it more than occasionally is relatively small. Not saying we never will add it to our test process, but it is a bit of a low priority at the moment. I do keep a running log of things we could potentially add to our testing, however, so what is it exactly you would like to see? Simply total export times or are there other things we could time?

3D workspace is currently in a pretty similar place. I think that is going to get more use over time, however, so it is something I hope to add eventually. Same question there - anything in particular we should test? Or just more of the same time to apply different effects?

Posted on 2017-03-06 03:52:06
Josh N

currently i run all my video thru photoshop's camera raw editor, using the smart filter, before i import it into premiere pro. it provides the best controls over exposure, lens correction, color temp, shadows/highlights... a lot of things. this doubles my workload but the results are noticeable over any tools ive seen come out for premiere pro(tho they have seen a large improvement). so being able to do this faster would drastically help my workload time.

so render times while using effects like smart filters with camera raw changes made would be a great help in deciding which CPU would be best. these processes would be much more intensive than normal photoshop operations and may benefit from different CPU types.

i'm less interested in the 3d workspace, ive only toyed with it a little bit, but would be interested in several functions of it.

Posted on 2017-03-06 04:22:55
Shutterbug

Hello,

May I please ask how the following have been addressed, and if you are planning a follow up review as a result:

1) Known issues with early BIOSes severely affecting Ryzen performance, especially with Asus boards
2) Known issues with Windows 10 and CCX handling (this in particular seems to be a major issue at the moment). Oddly, Windows 7 seems to handle it properly. A fix is likely imminent. Currently, Windows 10 is moving around threads around on the CPU which is normal, but on Ryzen, that needs to happen strictly within a CCX, otherwise you will incur a huge penalty when that thread no longer finds its data in the caches of the CCX.
3) Ryzen scales surprisingly well with fast RAM, much more so than Intel - results could possibly be significantly different with faster RAM

Lots of into available on the above online already, looks like there are a few kinks to iron out yet with Ryzen that should have a very significant effect on performance. How much those things effect Photoshop performance, well hopefully you can tell me that! :) Thanks and keep up the good work.

Posted on 2017-03-06 17:51:06

For the early platform issues, we are considering simply re-doing the testing around May or so. We have a number of projects in April that will take up the majority of our time, and giving AMD (or ASUS/whoever) 2 months to get the bugs out seems about right.

For the RAM speed, we typically stick with whatever speed the CPU is rated for simply because that is what we usually sell in our workstations. We do periodic RAM speed testing across various software packages, however, so in that same May timeline we might do some RAM speed analysis across AMD and Intel CPUs.

Posted on 2017-03-06 18:03:57
Tasos Papazahariou

How come the 7700k is faster than the 6900k? Photoshop not taking advantage of the 8 cores or something else?

Posted on 2017-03-17 05:56:30

Yes, that is exactly correct. Pretty much everything I've ever testing in Photoshop is able to make effective use of one or two cores, and a few things can effectively use up to around 4 cores. After that, there isn't much of a benefit so once you get up to a quad core CPU it is much more important to have those individual cores be as fast as possible rather than getting a CPU with more physical cores.

Posted on 2017-03-17 20:42:26
Tasos Papazahariou

Awesome,thanks!

Posted on 2017-03-17 22:22:53
PotatoShopped

Will there be any multitasking comparison of Intel and AMD? I use Photoshop and Premiere Pro and always have other software running alongside it, the 7700k seems to do better when focused only on one task, but does that change when we add more processes running alongside? I'd love to hear your opinion.

Posted on 2017-03-17 14:59:47

That kind of testing is something we've considered doing, but it is pretty complex to test accurately since there is such a variety of different programs we could test and even more variety of what you are doing in each program. However, what I can tell you is that if you tend to switch between those two programs, but only one of them is doing something (I.E. you switch to Photoshop and Premiere is just idle in the background) then there shouldn't be much of a difference in performance from what we tested in this article. If you do leave Premiere doing something in the background (rendering, running a warp stabilize, etc), then the extra cores in the Ryzen CPUs (or the higher core count Intel CPUs) should help a bit. Exactly how much is something I can't really saw, and it likely depends on exactly what each program is doing.

Posted on 2017-03-17 20:36:42
Swampemaskinen

I'm wondering if there has been improvements with the updates to microcode and BIOSs, and also the ryzen power profile.. any chance for a retest? :)

Posted on 2017-05-26 11:32:47
zencroww

Yes, please re-test with all the Optimisation and Firmware updates please!

Posted on 2017-05-28 09:07:30

Just making sure you guys saw our new Photoshop CPU article we put up the other day: https://www.pugetsystems.co... . We are using the latest BIOS, drivers, and other updates but there was not a significant performance improvement since the testing in this article. In fact, if you compare the raw results between the two articles, the only effect that had more than a percent or two difference in performance was "adaptive wide angle" where we saw a 12-20% gain in performance. Everything else simply went up or down a percent or two which is more likely simply our margin of error rather than any performance gain/loss.

We saw a 7% performance gain in Lightroom with all the updates, so I know there are gains to be had - they just aren't showing up in Photoshop.

Posted on 2017-07-06 18:47:41
Survunata

What a crap article, as if Photoshop are going to snub an entirely new architecture in their further updates...and as if the 7700k is anything more than an overpriced joke for all but tryhard 720p gamers.

Posted on 2017-06-06 15:23:23
Axe

Why is the RAM so low on the Ryzen?

Posted on 2017-07-23 07:40:18

Do you mean RAM amount or speed? Ryzen only supports 64GB of RAM so we tested with the maximum amount. For speed, we are actually already using higher speed RAM than AMD officially supports. AMD hides it for some reason, but according to https://community.amd.com/c... they only support DDR4-2667 RAM if using just 2 single-rank RAM sticks, DDR4-2400 is using 2 dual-rank RAM sticks, DDR4-2133 if using 4 single-rank RAM sticks, and DDR4-1866 if using 4 dual-rank RAM sticks. The RAM we are using is dual-rank and we are using 4 sticks of it, so we are technically already using two levels faster RAM than AMD supports. Using DDR4-1866 RAM doesn't seem fair, however, so we went ahead and tested with DDR4-2400 even though we typically only use the RAM speed that is officially supported by the manufacturer.

We actually have wanted to do some testing comparing different speeds of RAM with Ryzen simply to settle the question of whether higher speed RAM makes a difference in Photoshop (and other Adobe products), but in our testing we have run into stability issues with even DDR4-2666 RAM when the system is under heavy load. I'm sure higher speed RAM would improve performance a bit since people have shown it helping in things like gaming, but something to keep in mind is that our testing is first and foremost to help us determine what hardware to offer to our customers. Going that far outside of spec is something we usually heavily avoid, so testing DDR4-2667 or DDR4-3200 RAM is pretty low on our priority list. If you build your own computer and are willing to take on whatever risks come with being out of spec, that is 100% your choice - but the majority of our customers come to us because they are not the type of people who want to tinker or even think about their computer. They just want it to work so they can get their work done - hence why reliability is much more important to us than raw performance in most cases.

Posted on 2017-07-23 21:09:25
Axe

Long reply, all Ryzen boards now can use 3200mhz with the update of the AGESA 1.0.0.6a. After the BIOS update there's usually just 1 or 2 changes and it could help with most programs. Thanks for getting back to me.

Posted on 2017-07-23 21:31:17
KalliasX

Adobe needs to get their shit together and rewrite the code from the ground up, so it takes advantage of today's CPUs and GPUs, it's slow as molasses with computers that are ten million times faster than when Photoshop began. A Ryzen 8 core cpu should SMOKE a 7700K if Adobe knew how to code. They're lucky competitor programs like Affinity Photo which are infinitely more optimized to today's cpu architecture don't want to take on them on every level, like 3D, otherwise I would have switched already. Just my 2 cents

Posted on 2017-07-26 13:20:18

I too am a slave to Intel/Adobe. Sucks shit, wish I could switch the TR or Ryzen, but alas...

Posted on 2017-10-09 20:47:45