The M1-optimized machine was therefore 74 percent faster at this task. The M1-optimized version was able to complete the task in 9.6 seconds, while the Intel machine took 36.4 seconds. The M1-optimized machine was a whopping 78 percent faster at this particular task.įinally, the fourth benchmark asked each machine to increase the resolution of a 12-megapixel image with the newly-added Super Resolution feature.
#Adobe 10.1 for mac software
The M1-optimized software was able to complete this task in 14.6 seconds, while the Intel system took one minute and five seconds. The third benchmark asked both systems to synchronize color adjustments across 1000 images. That makes the M1 54 percent faster at this task.
The M1 version of Lightroom was able to do the task in six minutes and 13 seconds, while the Intel system took 13 minutes and 33 seconds. The second test asked each system to export 1000 RAW photos as JPEGs at 100 percent quality to the local SSD. The M1 version completed the benchmark in 28.9 seconds, while it took the Intel system 52.8 seconds which makes the M1 version 45 percent faster at this task. In the first test, 1,000 12.4-megapixel RAW photos were imported into both systems. We’ve also run our own benchmarks, which you can find here. In our coverage below, we’ve re-calculated the “percent faster” claims so that they are accurate, and we would caution readers to approach any percentages in the original report skeptically (and with a calculator). Several percentages mentioned throughout the rest of the report are also wrong.
#Adobe 10.1 for mac pro
Both systems were connected to an Apple Pro Display XDR during benchmarks.Įditor’s Note: The Pfeiffer Report that Adobe commissioned has a lot of great data that compares M1 performance to Intel, however, the percentages included in the table on have been calculated incorrectly. Batch editing photos is reportedly more than four times as fast.Īdobe commissioned a third party to test new versions of its M1-optimized software against an Intel equivalent and which goes into detail just how much better the M1 version is than Intel.įor these tests, the 13-inch Apple M1 MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD was compared against the 13-inch Intel Core i5 MacBook Pro with 16GB of RAM and a 2TB SSD. Launch, import, export, and browsing photos in loupe view is about twice as fast, and Super Resolution - which is new to this June release as well - is more than three times as fast on M1 than it is on an Intel machine. When compared to “an equivalent Intel Mac,” Adobe says that most operations are at least twice as fast while others are even faster. The company says that the combination of the M1 processor along with Adobe’s optimization for it has led to serious improvements. Lightroom can now run natively on Macs that are armed with Apple’s new M1 chip and Adobe promises that the improvements are notable. Though I believe hardware-wise it is also capable of H/W decompression.Native M1 Lightroom Classic Sees Huge Performance Gains Even the older 8600GT-M isn't on the list. Apple's official API supports only a few cards, namely the newer NVidia 9400M, the 330 and the 320.
It's not the fault of Adobe that only a subset of all graphics cards currently deployed on Apple machines are supported. Perhaps the shareholders should oust some people!? Just what in the he'll is really going on at adobe. Their CS Suites are getting lazy, innovative and buggier every release. If they can't do that how are they ever gonna get a mobile version up to par?Īnd for that matter. Was hoping they would have showed some dedication by now to have a decent desktop version.
#Adobe 10.1 for mac mac
I have an ATI Radeon 4870 hd in my mac pro. Thereby holding features hostage by software that simply lags. I see this as a fine example of what Jobs was referring to in regards to developers holding the ios back by not utilising up to date hardware. Once again adobe fails by falling behind. Apple just released their mac pros and aren't offering nvidia as an option.
0 kommentar(er)
