Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

LightRoom is very slow with 2012 12 core 3.06 Mac Pro

C

clipsedsm95

macrumors member
Original poster
May 17, 2012
94
4
New York
Hey guys so I bought my self a used mid 2012 Mac Pro with 32GB Ram and upgraded the CPU to 12 core 3.06 X5675 X2 from its original 12 core 2.4 E5645 X2. As well as a PCIe mount for my SSD 512GB MX200 (OS) to achieve 6G Speeds. AMD Radeon 7950 3GB VRAM and 4 1TB drives in a raid for my pictures (internal bays).

As the title states Lightroom CC 2015 can be painfully slow at times! Is there any reason for this is the software just not capable of using all cores or what is going on? I ask because when using software such as FCPX it works with out hesitation no freezes what so ever and export times and work flow are phenomenal. How could I get lightroom to work the same.

Thanks
 
If you have thousands of pictures (small files) in the HDDs, even they are in RAID 0, that will still be a big bottleneck. RAID 0 helps the sequential read / write speed, but for small files reading, the latency still there.

You may try to move few GB photos to the SSD, and check if there is any performance improvement.
 
h9826790 said:
If you have thousands of pictures (small files) in the HDDs, even they are in RAID 0, that will still be a big bottleneck. RAID 0 helps the sequential read / write speed, but for small files reading, the latency still there.

You may try to move few GB photos to the SSD, and check if there is any performance improvement.
Click to expand...
I want to ditch all the Disk drives and just buy 4 SSD's but the 3G speeds will throttle them also making the cost out weigh the benefit i'd assume?
 
will a raid be affected by the put hd's to sleep option in the energy saver panel in system prefes ?

might also be that the drives are getting full that can slow things down a lot, you want to keep more than 20% of your drive empty or it will slow down.

watch activity monitor when you work, it will show you cpu use and disc use both in IO&mb sec which will help reveal your problem

a SSD raid will be faster by a lot even in at sata 2 speeds + you can get a pci card for sata 3 speeds or PCI mount SSD's etc for more speed or even do something like this https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/pcie-card-to-hold-two-samsung-sm951s.1919439/
[doublepost=1459818384][/doublepost]can slow raid be a sign of a drive failure?
keep that thing backed up

do you relay need all 4TB of photos super fast, it's a lot cheaper to get 1 1TB ssd in a pci card like your os drive (or even buying a pci card that can hold 2 SSD's to replace the old card if your short on space) and keep just the images you need on the 1TB SSD and your greater library on the raid.

might also be something to ask help for on the adobe forums.
 
Last edited:
orph said:
will a raid be affected by the put hd's to sleep option in the energy saver panel in system prefes ?

might also be that the drives are getting full that can slow things down a lot, you want to keep more than 20% of your drive empty or it will slow down.

watch activity monitor when you work, it will show you cpu use and disc use both in IO&mb sec

a SSD raid will be faster by a lot even in at sata 2 speeds + you can get a pci card for sata 3 speeds or PCI mount SSD's etc for more speed or even do something like this https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/pcie-card-to-hold-two-samsung-sm951s.1919439/
[doublepost=1459818384][/doublepost]can slow raid be a sign of a drive failure?
keep that thing backed up
Click to expand...
I have the PCIe card for my SSD mount and for the disk drives its a 4TB raid set with only 1.3 GB in use
 
h9826790 said:
If you have thousands of pictures (small files) in the HDDs, even they are in RAID 0, that will still be a big bottleneck. RAID 0 helps the sequential read / write speed, but for small files reading, the latency still there.

You may try to move few GB photos to the SSD, and check if there is any performance improvement.
Click to expand...

You my friend are a genius! .... I thought of what you said and made a folder in LightRoom for my SSD. I will use this folder when editing and when done I will transfer pictures back to there original place!!!

I tried it and it was a success LightRoom is moving light speeds quicker. Thank you very much I honestly would have never thought of this idea!!
[doublepost=1459819020][/doublepost]
AidenShaw said:
Absolutely - failing sectors can trigger retries and IOs that take seconds to complete.

Look at the S.M.A.R.T. data....
Click to expand...
I made my raid using terminal. since Disk Utility in El Capitan no longer allows it.
Reading my disk utility now its confusing and does not read it as a RAID more like an unreadable drive under smart status it says unverified, I just downloaded the application onyx and will try to check for errors with that thank you.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: h9826790
Id relay have a look at the smart readout for your drive's and keep them backed up, what kind of drive are they WD red/black ? (hope there not WD greens they dont like raid and are slow :eek:)

iv got a double redundancy setup and hope to move to a triple redundancy setup with mixed media soon.
(i have nightmares of a massive drive failure)

if i was you id have something like a 1TB SSD via pci with resent/active work on, have the resent photos on the raid too (slight redundancy if one of the 2 die) then have a external backup (not raid) with all the work on.
ideally the external backup will be a double redundancy (not raid) or live all the time.
[doublepost=1459819618][/doublepost]is onyx the right app for a raid setup ?
do make shore your data is backed up before you mess with anything

i have smart utility https://www.volitans-software.com/apps/smart-utility/
there's a free trial, not shore if thats the best thing to use but you do need to be safe with a raid or you lose all your data
 
all seems well
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.29.56 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.29.56 PM.png
    95.3 KB · Views: 105
Some what
[doublepost=1459820919][/doublepost]
orph said:
Id relay have a look at the smart readout for your drive's and keep them backed up, what kind of drive are they WD red/black ? (hope there not WD greens they dont like raid and are slow :eek:)

iv got a double redundancy setup and hope to move to a triple redundancy setup with mixed media soon.
(i have nightmares of a massive drive failure)

if i was you id have something like a 1TB SSD via pci with resent/active work on, have the resent photos on the raid too (slight redundancy if one of the 2 die) then have a external backup (not raid) with all the work on.
ideally the external backup will be a double redundancy (not raid) or live all the time.
[doublepost=1459819618][/doublepost]is onyx the right app for a raid setup ?
do make shore your data is backed up before you mess with anything

i have smart utility https://www.volitans-software.com/apps/smart-utility/
there's a free trial, not shore if thats the best thing to use but you do need to be safe with a raid or you lose all your data
Click to expand...


I got these readings but this drives seem to be reaching there end game. Might have to get new drives SSD being the optimal choice.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.43.13 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.43.13 PM.png
    104.2 KB · Views: 97
  • Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.47.09 PM.png
    Screen Shot 2016-04-04 at 9.47.09 PM.png
    87.3 KB · Views: 99
iv not used a raid before so i may be wrong but smart is for showing that a drive is going to fail (or is still ok) while i assume that shows when it's already dead which if you have raid 0 will bring down your raid according to wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#RAID_0

edit saw your update, your drives look ok i think (iv never used a raid)

why not keep the drives but get some pci cards with SSD's on, you'll get a real speedup.
a SSD raid on a sata 2 bus will be faster than your currant setup but a SSD raid on pci cards will make it look slow and you can have a layer of redundancy of the data being on SSD and HD's
or like the link i posted earlier you can get a pcie ssd setup, see this topic for info
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...the-09-macpro-bootable-ngff-pcie-ssd.1685821/
thats the most speed you can get i think
 
Last edited:
orph said:
iv not used a raid before so i may be wrong but smart is for showing that a drive is going to fail (or is still ok) while i assume that shows when it's already dead which if you have raid 0 will bring down your raid according to wiki
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_RAID_levels#RAID_0

edit saw your update, your drives look ok i think (iv never used a raid)

why not keep the drives but get some pci cards with SSD's on, you'll get a real speedup.
a SSD raid on a sata 2 bus will be faster than your currant setup but a SSD raid on pci cards will make it look slow and you can have a layer of redundancy of the data being on SSD and HD's
or like the link i posted earlier you can get a pcie ssd setup, see this topic for info
https://forums.macrumors.com/thread...the-09-macpro-bootable-ngff-pcie-ssd.1685821/
thats the most speed you can get i think
Click to expand...

I have a PCIe SSD for my OS. Easiest fix is keep doing what im doing now until I can afford 4 SSD Drives
 
  • Like
Reactions: orph
RAID-0 or RAID-1? Software RAID-1 on OS X is terribly slow. For a 2 member RAID set the performance is half what a single drive would be.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back