# To Increase Ram Or Not To Increase Ram....



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

That is the question???? Current laptop is an Intel I5 processor at 1.6 ghz, with 8 gb of ram. It will handle up to 16 gb which is what I'm considering. My son the resident family IT expert, seems to think I won't see any significant improvement in speed of LR or PS, and I should just put the money toward a new laptop which is also a possibility, but the ram upgrade is pretty cheap compared to a new unit (and I could put the money on more photography gear). So what say others?


----------



## JonA_CT (Nov 26, 2017)

Not an IT guy , but my brother is, and he said the same thing when I was discussing building an editing desktop. He suggested that a solid state drive, good graphics card, and processor speed would  be the place to invest the most money.


----------



## Overread (Nov 26, 2017)

If you check the performance whilst running the software then unless your RAM is fully in use you might not see a huge performance increase. 

Otherwise as said above you want a better processor and graphics card - a solid state drive helps too with loading times (you'd install the software on the SSD drive but have the photos in a regular drive)


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

What specific model is your laptop ?


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

Dell Inspirion


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

model number should be printed somewhere on the bottom ...


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> model number should be printed somewhere on the bottom ...



Sorry, it's an Inspirion 5558


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

Processor
Intel Core i5-5200U
Graphics adapter
NVIDIA GeForce 920M - 4096 MB, Core: 954 MHz, Memory: 900 MHz, DDR3, ForceWare 353.30 (10.18.13.5330), Optimus
Memory 
8192 MB, DDR3-1600, dual-channel, two memory banks (filled)
Display
15.6 inch 16:9, 1920x1080 pixel, LG Philips 156WF6, IPS, glossy: no
Mainboard
Intel Broadwell-U PCH-LP (Premium)
Storage
Toshiba MQ01ABD100, 1000 GB , 5400 rpm


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

@dxqcanada okay I know all that already??? Your point is?


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

Sorry, I didn't get time to write anything ... and I thought others should know what you got in it before commenting

Optimize performance Photoshop CC
PS by default will use up to 70% of RAM ... so if your laptop is always showing max usage, then a memory upgrade would help.
I don't think your graphics card is upgradable ... which is typical for a laptop.
A solid state drive typically will add performance to most systems.


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> I don't think your graphics card is upgradable ... which is typical for a laptop.
> A solid state drive typically will add performance to most systems.



In this model the graphics card is an Intel HD 6000, which supposedly is compatible with LR and PS but for some reason LR will kick out the "use graphics processor" on boot up, but I can go in preferences and check it, everything works fine. PS uses it with no problem. Went back to the log, it's failing on something (can't remember now, and haven't had time to sort it out)


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

It should have two graphics cards ... the integrated Intel and a discrete Nvidia
Hmm, maybe check to see if there is an updated Nvidia driver for the graphics card ... also check the Nvidia control panel to see if it has a setting to enable it for usage for LR and PS (I think).


----------



## dxqcanada (Nov 26, 2017)

Hmm, I think the Nvidia control panel option is for 3D ... so my suggestion there would not apply.


----------



## snowbear (Nov 26, 2017)

I thought this thread was going to be about expanding a sheep farm.

RAM may not speed things up, but it would help running additional apps at the same time.  For example, my cheap@$$-no-memory laptop will run Chrome and (Lightroom or Photoshop) but has a problem with all three at the same time.  My last panorama had to be assembled in stages because it will only process a few of these larger D750 images at a time.


----------



## Fstop- (Nov 26, 2017)

You should be able to buy another 8G of RAM for $50. or under, it should speed it up a little. 

I just put 8G of RAM on top of 8G of existing RAM in two lenovos it helped quite a bit. cost about $40. each took. 10 mins to install.


----------



## weepete (Nov 26, 2017)

My understanding of PS and LR was they are both heavily CPU dependant. If I remember correctly LR only uses the GFX card for library previews and PS for some filters though you will need a GFX card for some tools to work, an entry level card should be enough to run these programs.

Photoshop does eat RAM though, so the more you have the better, bearing in mind that you would probably see a bigger speed increase with a slightly better processor and slightly less RAM than a slightly worse processor and slightly more RAM. 8GB is probably the minimum you'd want just now though so an upgrade to 16GB would not be a bad choice.

Processor looks like it's getting on a bit though. PS scales to about 4 cores but drops off sharply from there. A faster 4 core processor and 16-32GB of RAM is probably where you'd really see a significant speed increase so IMO the best option is to upgrade the whole system.


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

dxqcanada said:


> It should have two graphics cards ... the integrated Intel and a discrete Nvidia
> Hmm, maybe check to see if there is an updated Nvidia driver for the graphics card ... also check the Nvidia control panel to see if it has a setting to enable it for usage for LR and PS (I think).



I checked the intel site for updates on the HD 6000 drivers but not the other. Hmmm need to research that.



Fstop- said:


> You should be able to buy another 8G of RAM for $50. or under, it should speed it up a little.



I was hoping mine had (1) 8gb stick, unfortunately I opened the back to find (2) single slots with 4 gb each  So an upgrade with 2 8 gig sticks is about $120 to $150 depending on the mfg.



weepete said:


> If I remember correctly LR only uses the GFX card for library previews



LR6 uses graphics acceleration on supported cards in the develop module only. The speed is significant on highly edited images when using adjustment brushes. Requires a compatible card running 64 bit in windows, and OpenGL 3.3 (or later) -capable video adapter for GPU-related functionality. When LR opens it checks your card in my case I get this "Check OpenGL Support: failed", and it automatically defaults to not use graphics acceleration.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 26, 2017)

I have a Dell Inspiron 15.  I upped the memory to 12gb and noticed an improvement.
But it also depends upon what else is running.  I make sure antivirus is mostly disabled when I do LR.  I store my photos and library on an external drive.

But since I have upgraded to a much faster desktop computer with a graphics card and use the laptop only rarely now for LR.


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

astroNikon said:


> But since I have upgraded to a much faster desktop computer with a graphics card and use the laptop only rarely now for LR.



I have a desktop that I rarely use as travel makes it difficult


----------



## Fstop- (Nov 26, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> I was hoping mine had (1) 8gb stick, unfortunately I opened the back to find (2) single slots with 4 gb each  So an upgrade with 2 8 gig sticks is about $120 to $150 depending on the mfg.



I don't think I would spend that much on RAM. I would probably start looking at an upgrade.


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 26, 2017)

smoke665 said:


> astroNikon said:
> 
> 
> > But since I have upgraded to a much faster desktop computer with a graphics card and use the laptop only rarely now for LR.
> ...


I was looking at upgrading to this new laptop.  I-7 processor, 12 GB ram, etc for $800 (on sale) ==> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/dell-i...b-hard-drive-era-gray/6083546.p?skuId=6083546

the desktop is my kids computer mostly. I sometimes get to sneak on it.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 26, 2017)

It's easy to tell if you're out of ram.


----------



## smoke665 (Nov 26, 2017)

Braineack said:


> It's easy to tell if you're out of ram.



Yeah I know, the only reason I was looking was the fact that I allocated 60% to LR which can create problems with running other applications at the same time.


----------



## bratkinson (Nov 26, 2017)

Your best option is to buy a better laptop...IF you can tolerate Windows 10! <blaaaahhhhhhhh!>  A faster dual processor, or even a quad processor will work wonders in Lightroom and Photoshop Elements.  So will more RAM.  The best deals will be in January, when they're trying to close out discontinued models for a song.  About 18 months ago, I picked up a surprisingly fast 2.2 ghz dual processor ASUS laptop for a friend that I kept watching all laptop prices online at Walmart for a couple of weeks.  Finally, what was a $600+ computer was $175.  I had to tell the clerk their computer says they have 4 of them.  None were out on the floor, they were in the back room.

Plan B is to upgrade what you have.  And yes, adding RAM will do the job.  BUT... you will be REPLACING the two 4gb sticks with two 8gb sticks.  I don't think there's 4 slots in any laptop!  I'd also recommend you replace the hard drive with a SSD (Solid State Drive).

One of the things I noticed about Lightroom 5.7 on my Win 64 bit overclocked 8 processor computer is that the more pictures you are editing in a catalog, the slower it gets.  It never modifies the original image.  What it does is it keeps a list of changes you made, 'single file', for each image.  So, while editing image #2, every change gets recorded 'at the end of the file' of all the changes already made to the entire set of images.  As a former mainframe programmer, I'm surprised they don't keep a link-list for each image.  But nooooo!  It acts as if it is one giant file and each new change (click) forces it to read from the start to the end of the giant list and then plop the new change at the end of the list...sort of like building a stone walkway and the pile of stones is behind you.  You have to walk along every previously-laid stone to lay the next one.  Even with my screaming processor, I limit my editing to about 150 images, making 10-15 adjustments to each (some en-mass/sync/previous) I can see the wait time before it's done and I get control back getting longer and longer.  Oh...and when exporting, it uses all 8 processors according to my hardware monitor program.

Replacing your hard drive with an SSD will also speed up things noticeably, regardless of whether or not you added RAM.  I put all of Windows files and Lightroom and its temporary files on SSD.  The big one is the page file.  When RAM gets filled and you open the next picture, there's no other choice than to 'swap out' one or more 'not recently accessed' pictures/RAM to SSD to make room for the next one in RAM.  And when you access one of the swapped out pix, it will first roll something else out and swap in the one you wanted.  I've put SSDs in my desktop and laptop and it's money well spent!

Oh...and for best performance, don't be running any other applications concurrently.


----------



## Braineack (Nov 27, 2017)

Lightroom does worse with more cores. Anything over 4 core is diminishing returns for LR: Adobe Lightroom CC/6 Multi Core Performance

More RAM will only help if you're running out of RAM.  Open Task Manager, click performance, and see how much of your 8GB your system is using with LR open.

SSD is good.


----------



## bratkinson (Nov 27, 2017)

Braineack said:


> Lightroom does worse with more cores. Anything over 4 core is diminishing returns for LR: Adobe Lightroom CC/6 Multi Core Performance



Per the above article, more cores generally equates to slower clock rates (individual processor speed) to maintain both price points and limitations of cooling.  That's especially true on laptops due to their very limited CPU cooling capabilities.   CPU manufacturers have designed separate lines of cool-running processors primarily for use in laptops.  Slower clock speeds are the easiest means to keep things cool.

That's why I do all my photo editing using a tower computer I built a couple years ago using an 8 processor AMD FX-8370 overclocked to 4.7 ghz.  (It's really easy using 2 steps faster RAM than the MOBO requires!).  Not to brag, but Lightroom is essentially 'no waiting' for everything I do until I've made maybe 3,000 total edits (SYNC across 100 photos of 5 changes = 500 separate edits to get stored, as each photo can be 'undone' individually), then I have to wait a bit for each change to get saved.  I've always been a 'speed demon', first, cars, now, computers 50 years later!


----------



## Braineack (Nov 27, 2017)

I had the FX-8320 clocked to 4.2 and LR was absolutely junk on it.

I finally swapped out the MB/CPU/RAM for the intel i7-7700k and there's no comparison between the two in terms of performance.

couldn't even watch 4k videos on the AMD...


----------



## astroNikon (Nov 27, 2017)

FYI, there are "hybrid" hard disks where have the regular platters spinning and a SSD in one unit.
They are in laptops and help you get a fast performance, with more cheaper storage.  Such as this example ==> https://www.bestbuy.com/site/dell-i...brid-hard-drive-black/5709801.p?skuId=5709801

per the above link
"2-in-1 hybrid hard drive provides both size and speed
Incorporates a large-capacity 1TB hard drive at 5400 rpm for ample storage, with 8GB of NAND Flash memory to speed up start times and accelerate frequently accessed data."


----------



## ac12 (Dec 18, 2017)

I concur, the 1.6GHz cpu is behind the power curve for serious photo editing.
When I was at my nephew's wedding, I only did the minimum amount of editing there, for only a couple dozen photos.  My laptop was taking too long to process the images.  Just not enough horsepower.
I did ALL the images at home on my mini-tower (4 cores and 3.2GHz).

Also when photo editing, do not run other applications, as they suck CPU cycles from the photo editor, and make the editor run slower.


----------



## Light Guru (Dec 18, 2017)

You will probably see more performance increase by getting a SSD hard drive.


----------



## ac12 (Dec 18, 2017)

Light Guru said:


> You will probably see more performance increase by getting a SSD hard drive.



Depends on where the bottleneck is.  You need to look at the resource monitor or task manager when the system slows down.

If the drive is at 100% for any significant amount of time, then it is the drive.
If the CPU is running at or near max for a significant amount of time, it's the processor.
This was my problem on the laptop.

If the used memory is at or near your physical RAM, then your system could be swapping, and slowing down.


----------

