[cajun0518]

you could also look into alienware m11x =)

[jolepp]

AFAIK ... Lightroom does not benefit much from a) more CPU cores or b) high end graphics adapter. Both of these have the parallel processing potential to give graphics processing a significant boost, but it would seem that LR does not take optimal (or even decent) advantage of this (*) , probably because its core design / SW architecture predates such hardware (being common). My observation with LR (3.5) has been that it uses memory quite sparingly itself, adding more probably helps speed because the system can use that for disk caching which will speed things up on something that is pretty disk i/o intensive: access to the original image files, previews and raw converter cache simply becomes several orders of magnitude faster once these have been cached.

Form the above it would follow that getting the fastest CPU (clock) with the fastest memory bus instead of maximum number of cores would be optimal and that the GPU is more or less irrelevant (**) (for LR). The most critical single thing is having enough memory. I believe 4G is sufficient and 8G worth having (diminishing returns); this implies a 64-bit CPU and OS.

(*) This can be seen in Windows task manager: typical situation when LR is working on, say, an import is that one core is at ~100% and the others pretty much idle.

(**) Having one with dedicated memory / bus to the same would help to take off load from the main memory bus and so help some though as it allows the GPU to keep out of the CPU's way.

[Class A]

define fine? because there is a difference when a graphics card is only able to barely run, run basic, run efficiently, and optimally efficient.

Lightroom doesn't require anything special from the graphics card. It doesn't exploit fancy graphics cards.

If we were talking about 3D games using textures, pixel shaders, etc then it would make sense to talk about a graphics card running "barely" or "efficiently". But we are not. If Lightroom needs a better than basic graphics card then web browsing does too.

From an Adobe article about "Optimising Lightroom performance":

"Lightroom requires a video card that can run the monitor at its native resolution. Built-in, default cards that ship with most desktop or laptop systems typically suffice for Lightroom."

Remember, the article is about "optimisation". If there were any point in using a higher spec graphics card, you'd find a recommendation in the article.

[Pentaxor]

Lightroom doesn't require anything special from the graphics card. It doesn't exploit fancy graphics cards.

If we were talking about 3D games using textures, pixel shaders, etc then it would make sense to talk about a graphics card running "barely" or "efficiently". But we are not. If Lightroom needs a better than basic graphics card then web browsing does too.

From an Adobe article about "Optimising Lightroom performance":

"Lightroom requires a video card that can run the monitor at its native resolution. Built-in, default cards that ship with most desktop or laptop systems typically suffice for Lightroom."

Remember, the article is about "optimisation". If there were any point in using a higher spec graphics card, you'd find a recommendation in the article.

thank you. and by the way, let me just quote myself on that part of the statement which you purposely removed >>> "warning: do not get a laptop with a shared gpu memory. btw, it doesn't need to be the latest graphics card. and not too old.". I think it's pretty obvious what I was trying to say here.

[Class A]

I did mention I recommend 8 GB, especially alongside PS CS5 which is more terrible memory hog than LR.

We agree that more memory makes sense when you run other programs along side of Lightroom.

Lightroom itself, does not need a lot of memory. You can check its memory consumption under "Help | System Info...". Lightroom developers also confirm that Lightroom won't claim a lot of memory unless it runs into a memory leak problem.

However, it is apparently true that allowing Lightroom access to more than 4GB can improve its performance. I guess that it uses larger caches in this case. This seems to be suboptimal programming again.

you practically misunderstood my statement by cutting of some crucial part of it.

I didn't misunderstand your statement. You are recommending a better than basic graphics card. However, Lightroom does not make use of better than basic graphics cards. I'm not convinced that even shared memory graphics adapters cause a noticeable slowdown.

Lightroom's image pipeline is magnitudes slower than image display and the Lua code for the GUI is anything but optimal. I'm not convinced you'd be able to measure a significant difference between a shared memory graphics adapter and a better one when using Lightroom.

[steve1307]

The Lenovo X220 12.5" is currently available with an IPS panel, its the only one i've seen.
but....
1) its tiny
2) its very expensive
3) only the i7 version has USB 3.0
4) no dedicated graphics card (but it has 6GB up to 8GB)
5) its very expensive
However there is a black Friday special on somewhere on Amazon (US only) for about $1100 as opposed to $2000+ here. No thanks.



The ASUS U36SD - DH51 looks pretty good i5 2nd gen 4GB (easily changed to 8GB) it does have a graphics card but a pretty low spec one as far as gaming goes. The GT520M is only slightly higher rated than the i5-2430 spec HD3000 integrated unit.
The ASUS U46SV - DH51 for the same money but higher spec same i5 + 8GB + GT540M is also tempting. Pity the hard drives are only 5400rpm and a buried deep inside on these 2 so more tricky to replace.
I also like Toshibas R830 series, thin & light, decent full voltage processor, & includes a DVD, but no dedicated GPU.
I like Tohibas as I've had 4 Tecras in the last 12 years and theyve been worked hard too (environment-wise). One died a noble death in a factory buried in cement powder.


I'm questioning if it really necessary to have a dedicated GPU for "normal" processing. I won't be doing Gigapixel panoramas.
The copy of LR3 I had installed installed on my work machine is set to use the Integrated GPU by default, and it worked fine for me.
I only discovered this by starting the program "Right Click" > "run with graphics processor" and either can be selected with the default setting of the integrated one.

The 3D AutoCAD packages I'm also running on the machine use the dedicated unit by default. So do various video players of course.


I also note that all the half decent GPU's seem to be only in bigger units 15.6" - 17" for higher res FHD screens and easier cooling for the GPU.


Anyway, thanks for the input so far, but I'm still uncertain about the dedicated GPU.
i5 or i7 processor (tick), 8GB (tick), USB 3.0 (tick), fast HDD? .. hmm replace with 7200 or SSD



PS: If I can convince the IT guy to let me run VMWARE on my machine I can install myself and run LR3 as an administrator on the virtual machine and be totally isolated from my (now secured) work PC. ( i7-2720QM 2.2GHz , 8GB , GT540M -2GB, 750GB at 7200rpm, 15.6" 1920x1080 glossy)

Has anyone run Lightroom or CS on virtual machine? eg if you have 2 different operating systems Mac + Windows on the same machine.
I've seen it done before, running Windows based PLC programming software on a MacBook in VM environment.



Edit: I think jolepp & ClassA (in the last 2 posts) just explained why when i spoke to Adobe they didn't stipulate a dedicated GPU for running LR. As long as integrated processor can "share" enough memory for graphics if it needs to. Thanks.

[Pentaxor]

I didn't misunderstand your statement. You are recommending a better than basic graphics card. However, Lightroom does not make use of better than basic graphics cards. I'm not convinced that even shared memory graphics adapters cause a noticeable slowdown.

Lightroom's image pipeline is magnitudes slower than image display and the Lua code for the GUI is anything but optimal. I'm not convinced you'd be able to measure a significant difference between a shared memory graphics adapter and a better one when using Lightroom.

you don't have to be convinced. all I'm saying is based on what I had and presently experience with shared memory gpu's. and there hasn't been an incident that a shared gpu would run as good or efficient with one with dedicated video ram. of course, cpu processor is also considered in this. the basic graphics card in a laptop/notebook are memory shared. since gpu itself borrow some of the system memory under the same bus rather than have it's own memory to process in it's own bus, it creates a traffic or additional set of instruction that would hinder the efficiency of the operation. whether you like it or not, shared memory runs this way. if any of my laptop with a shared gpu memory run as efficiently as with one with a dedicated memory, I would be happy. again, just my observation and love to be proven wrong.

[Pentaxor]

The Lenovo X220 12.5" is currently available with an IPS panel, its the only one i've seen.
but....
1) its tiny
2) its very expensive
3) only the i7 version has USB 3.0
4) no dedicated graphics card (but it has 6GB up to 8GB)
5) its very expensive
However there is a black Friday special on somewhere on Amazon (US only) for about $1100 as opposed to $2000+ here. No thanks.



The ASUS U36SD - DH51 looks pretty good i5 2nd gen 4GB (easily changed to 8GB) it does have a graphics card but a pretty low spec one as far as gaming goes. The GT520M is only slightly higher rated than the i5-2430 spec HD3000 integrated unit.
The ASUS U46SV - DH51 for the same money but higher spec same i5 + 8GB + GT540M is also tempting. Pity the hard drives are only 5400rpm and a buried deep inside on these 2 so more tricky to replace.
I also like Toshibas R830 series, thin & light, decent full voltage processor, & includes a DVD, but no dedicated GPU.
I like Tohibas as I've had 4 Tecras in the last 12 years and theyve been worked hard too (environment-wise). One died a noble death in a factory buried in cement powder.


I'm questioning if it really necessary to have a dedicated GPU for "normal" processing. I won't be doing Gigapixel panoramas.
The copy of LR3 I had installed installed on my work machine is set to use the Integrated GPU by default, and it worked fine for me.
I only discovered this by starting the program "Right Click" > "run with graphics processor" and either can be selected with the default setting of the integrated one.

The 3D AutoCAD packages I'm also running on the machine use the dedicated unit by default. So do various video players of course.


I also note that all the half decent GPU's seem to be only in bigger units 15.6" - 17" for higher res FHD screens and easier cooling for the GPU.


Anyway, thanks for the input so far, but I'm still uncertain about the dedicated GPU.
i5 or i7 processor (tick), 8GB (tick), USB 3.0 (tick), fast HDD? .. hmm replace with 7200 or SSD



PS: If I can convince the IT guy to let me run VMWARE on my machine I can install myself and run LR3 as an administrator on the virtual machine and be totally isolated from my (now secured) work PC. ( i7-2720QM 2.2GHz , 8GB , GT540M -2GB, 750GB at 7200rpm, 15.6" 1920x1080 glossy)

Has anyone run Lightroom or CS on virtual machine? eg if you have 2 different operating systems Mac + Windows on the same machine.
I've seen it done before, running Windows based PLC programming software on a MacBook in VM environment.

what I can advise you is buy something that you are confident that would work and doesn't fail your expectations. the pc that you are currently using is already a monster. something lesser or in between it should work. besides, medium end laptops are cheap nowadays. they usually cost at around $750-$800. just be careful not to buy those overpriced lappys with poor specs.

[torpesco]

Sorry, my bad if they don't do a laptop with an IPS panel. I know that (at least some of) their desktop Cinema displays use IPS panels and somehow thought some of their laptops get IPS panels as well.

Yeah, just the cinema or thunderbolt display now.

Yeah, I just figured you might have thought that about IPS because of the desktops/monitors. Sorry for the abrupt response - I was (and am) writing from the mobile site and I erred on the side of brevity.

HP EliteBook 8740w, however, there is some dispute whether the 8740 really has an IPS panel. The 8730w seemed to have had one.

Have you looked at Lenovo?

When it comes to replacing my laptop I'll definitely have to look at HP and Lenovo. The last time I looked (and decided to wait), Lenovo had just discontinued their IPS model, and I didn't see reference to the HP anywhere.

Very good to know of other possible sources for a laptop with a better display.

Part of me is actually tempted to just get a MacBook Air and a separate monitor. If only the Air had an 8GB version. Maybe it will by the time I buy...

[jolepp]

...
Has anyone run Lightroom or CS on virtual machine? eg if you have 2 different operating systems Mac + Windows on the same machine.
I've seen it done before, running Windows based PLC programming software on a MacBook in VM environment.
...

I currently have LR 3.5 in a VirtualBox (Linux host, WinXP 32-bit guest), has worked ok so far. Ìn fact this is how I realized that LR itself does not use as much memory as I would have assumed. Initially I allocated 3G for the guest but I'm now down to 1G as it would seem that the extra memory is more use for a disk cache on the Linux side. Also, because this works nicely enough and because VirtualBox only gives the guest OS a fairly basic (emulated) virtual display adapter it would seem that having a top-notch GPU is not that critical. Also, while looking for a way to make both the cores of my relatively low spec laptop (2 core 1.9GHz, 4G RAM) available to the guest OS I run into some page or other where it was convincingly explained why there would be little benefit to that (which is just as well, as the CPU of this El-Cheapo Compaq is a celeron which does not have the required virtualization extensions ).

The most annoying delay is when I initially pick an image for 1:1 view which spends quite a while "Loading ...". After what I assume is the delay for the raw cache file to be generated things work quite snappily . Here, probably, I could use a faster CPU.

Otoh I'm rather new to LR myself and don't have a native installation for a baseline so I might be easily pleased. .

[Jasvox]

I am running LR 3.5 (and earlier versions before now) on my 4 year old Vaio with 1.5G of RAM, a Pentium processor and a hard drive which is about 90% full...no problems. I think your machine should be able to handle it fine if this one can.

Jason

[steve1307]

OP Post script: I almost forgot about this thread.

Thanks for the useful information everybody.

I ended up ordering a new laptop for personal use & running LR etc. . It's getting delivered tomorrow.

After 20yrs of having complete FREE-dom with a work laptop for personal use, I suppose it had to end eventually.
Now, there's no chance of me lugging my heavy "corporate-ised" secured & encrypted machine with me on holidays.

My new lightweight one will be a joy to carry around by comparison.

Toshiba Portege R835 - P81
13.3" screen (1.45kg)
i5 - 2435M (2.4GHz)
6 GB (4+2)
640 GB HDD (but 5400rpm)
USB 3.0

It doesnt have a dedicated GPU but that doesnt appear to be needed for LR. I don't waste my time gaming which is pretty much the only time it makes a big difference.


The 5400rpm drive might be a bit slow but if it's really annoying it can be tossed for a $200 128 GB SSD pretty easily. The original mechanical drive can be used for external storage.
The screen is just average and the speaker are apparently rubbish but hey, you can't have everything.


B&H comes up tops again, it was under 800 bucks. The closest locally available is the "business" version (R830) which is double the price.
No local warranty but I've only had 1 warranty issue with one out of the 4 Tecra's I've had in the last 12 years. (battery connection to the motherboard was DOA).
If everything starts up on day 1 its all sweet.

Delivery in about 80hours from ordering in NYC to my place in Sydney only 60 bucks is amazing.
The laptop bag I ordered from Melbourne (stock) at the same time, I was told today probably won't even be in the Sydney warehouse until Monday (go figure)

[Pentaxor]

OP Post script: I almost forgot about this thread.

Thanks for the useful information everybody.

I ended up ordering a new laptop for personal use & running LR etc. . It's getting delivered tomorrow.

After 20yrs of having complete FREE-dom with a work laptop for personal use, I suppose it had to end eventually.
Now, there's no chance of me lugging my heavy "corporate-ised" secured & encrypted machine with me on holidays.

My new lightweight one will be a joy to carry around by comparison.

Toshiba Portege R835 - P81
13.3" screen (1.45kg)
i5 - 2435M (2.4GHz)
6 GB (4+2)
640 GB HDD (but 5400rpm)
USB 3.0

It doesnt have a dedicated GPU but that doesnt appear to be needed for LR. I don't waste my time gaming which is pretty much the only time it makes a big difference.


The 5400rpm drive might be a bit slow but if it's really annoying it can be tossed for a $200 128 GB SSD pretty easily. The original mechanical drive can be used for external storage.
The screen is just average and the speaker are apparently rubbish but hey, you can't have everything.


B&H comes up tops again, it was under 800 bucks. The closest locally available is the "business" version (R830) which is double the price.
No local warranty but I've only had 1 warranty issue with one out of the 4 Tecra's I've had in the last 12 years. (battery connection to the motherboard was DOA).
If everything starts up on day 1 its all sweet.

Delivery in about 80hours from ordering in NYC to my place in Sydney only 60 bucks is amazing.
The laptop bag I ordered from Melbourne (stock) at the same time, I was told today probably won't even be in the Sydney warehouse until Monday (go figure)

the biggest misconception about gpu power necessity is that it is only useful for gaming. let me remind you that such gpu power is essential for video and graphics programs. it may not be much use for photo editing, but it doesn't mean it is only good for gaming.