Jump to content
You must now use your email address to sign in [click for more info] ×

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'performance'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


Forums

  • Affinity Support
    • News and Information
    • Frequently Asked Questions
    • Affinity Support & Questions
    • Feedback & Suggestions
  • Learn and Share
    • Tutorials (Serif and Customer Created Tutorials)
    • Share your work
    • Resources
  • Bug Reporting
    • V2 Bugs found on macOS
    • V2 Bugs found on Windows
    • V2 Bugs found on iPad
    • Reports of Bugs in Affinity Version 1 applications
  • Beta Software Forums
    • 2.4 New Features and Improvements
    • Other New Bugs and Issues in the Betas
    • Beta Software Program Members Area
    • [ARCHIVE] Reports from earlier Affinity betas

Find results in...

Find results that contain...


Date Created

  • Start

    End


Last Updated

  • Start

    End


Filter by number of...

Joined

  • Start

    End


Group


Website URL


Location


Interests


Member Title

  1. Hi all, I have been a long-time user of AD and AP (since they were in betas!). I have always known AD+AP to be blazing fast. I have typically used AD+AP on my Mac Pro or my Macbook Pro. The Mac Pro was pretty much 60fps most of the time, and the Macbook Pro performed admirably, though not quite as well as the Mac Pro, understandably. I recently purchased the newest 5K iMac (the fastest processor and graphics specs available) for 2015. The performance is pretty mediocre on this device, relative to my other devices running AD+AP. In particular, scrolling is very choppy for large photos, though the marching ants have issues when there are a lot on the screen as well. I am a long-time developer so I'm fully aware of the GPU class in the iMacs, as well as the increase in pixel density, dimensions, etc., and how all of that requires better hardware to run efficiently. I was wondering if the Affinity team is preparing any updates to speed things up for the 5K iMacs? Or does the Affinity team feel they have achieved the best performance from a software standpoint, and performance gains will only be seen when the hardware improves for 5K iMacs? Cheers!
  2. First of all, well done! I've been contemplating an Adobe free lifestyle and Affinity Photo may just be the first piece in the solution. So I wanted to suggest that the app give us better feedback when it's doing something. I'm running it on a mid-2012 MacBook Pro Retina with 8GB of ram and see the spinning beach ball a lot, no really, a LOT. Of course I'm working on multiple layers of 24MP raw files. That's enough to tax a system! Still, it would be very helpful to see some progress bars so I know what the app is thinking. Cheers!
  3. Hi, I run into performance issues with AP ... but i hear so many are very happy with AP concerning performance. I read more in the forum, and the only time I saw comparable performance comments as i experience, was when people used large displays. As my hardware is powerful enough and other programs do not suffer from bad performance. So i thought i ask for feedback from you, my question would be: What monitor and resolution do you have, and how is your performance? My two answers would be: Dell 32 inch 4k; bad performance Macbook Retina; ok performance I would be thankful for your input. All the best Sascha
  4. Not much to say, the one line about performance enhancement of 400% ´in most cases´ appears to hold untrue at least for opening RAW files from my much beloved Fuji X-Pro1: still the exact same 22 seconds, alas. When also noticing the same issues with incomplete Exif data for my Fujinon XF-lenses and Zeiss Touit, I was already too much disappointed and decided to give it a break for the moment. I didn´t check further processing after that to be honest. :(
  5. I'm curious as to how each of the items affects the applications' performance. There's no explanation in the help files. RAM Usage Limit: I notice this can be dragged up to ~64 GB (which is more than 5 times how much RAM my Mac has...); does lessening the amount keep the application running smoothly... or do I need to open it up to the maximum amt of RAM I have so that it doesn't get "bottled up"? Disk Usage Warning Limit: This one's a bit confusing--does the application warn you if there's less than the set amount when you try to save a document? Again, the max is set at 64GB, even though my hard drive has 40 GB of free space at the moment. Undo Limit: I presume that the lower I set this, the less RAM the application will need Dither gradients: faster performance checked, or unchecked? Use precise clipping: same question Use hardware OpenGL: same User only integrated GPU: same
  6. Hi Guys. My name is Andreas Schmidt from Germany. Who of you used Affinity Photo and Designer on a new MacPro with D300 graphics card? I use the programs Affinity Photo and Desinger on a new MacPro and I must say that's rather poor performance compared to my MacBookPro (2012). It takes more than 40-60 seconds before launch the two programs on the MacPro, on the MacBook just 2 seconds. Even when processing OpenType fonts, the Great is more sluggish compared to the Little ones. Can someone confirm the problem ???? It is a clean and newly installed OS X 10.10.4 with 16GB of memory. Access rights were checked and repaired. Thanks for your help and sorry for the bad english. Best regards from Germany
  7. Not sure if I'm being excessive but I'd love to see a performance bump for the paint mixer brush. I love the idea of opening a big canvas and just starting to paint with it. But on big canvases it's pretty slow, I understand that this tool must be far more expensive than standard paint but I'd love it to be faster, I've attached a video showing the performance I'm getting on a 6k file. For the record I'm on a 12-core Mac Pro (Dustbin) with 64gb of RAM. ..never bloody pleased are we? But in my endless showing off and blabbing about photo, this is a feature that seems to get a lot of people excited. mixer brush.mov
  8. I have always noticed that dragging objects with applied effects (such as something simple like a stroke) lead to poor performance in Affinity Designer, particularly low frame rates and refresh rates. Since upgrading to Yosemite, however, these issues seem to have compounded. Attached is a video of the performance issues of simply dragging an object with a stroke. Note that the recording accurately represents what I'm seeing on screen; the recording isn't just at a low frame rate. Is anyone else noticing these performance issues? Basic computer specs: Mac Pro mid 2010 3.33 GHz 6-Core Intel Xeon 16GB RAM ATI Radeon HD 5870 1024 MB poor-performance.mov
  9. On a mid-2011 MacBook Pro w/8GB of RAM and 421 fonts installed, rendering the font dropdown with previews takes about 11 seconds the first time. That's a lot more fonts than I thought I had installed, but I bet a lot of your prospective users have that many or more, and not everyone uses font management software to disable seldom used fonts. Once the menu is rendered, you can start typing the name of the font you want and skip directly to it, rather than scrolling through the menu, which is nice, but there's no way to start typing without invoking the dropdown. If you do decide to scroll through the list, the scrolling is a bit jittery, even after the previews have been cached. A couple suggestions: 1) Add a preference to disable the font previews. It's a great feature, but one you might not always need, and I'm sure that menu would render a lot faster if it didn't have to create all of those previews. 2) Change the font dropdown to a "combo box" control (e.g., http://dev.sencha.com/ext/5.0.1/examples/kitchensink/#form-combos), and only render previews when the user clicks the disclosure triangle side to open the dropdown. Otherwise, when typing directly in the text input side of the combo box, render an autocomplete menu in plain text.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Guidelines | We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.