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

Relevant hardware components for Affinity software (PC)


Recommended Posts

Hi guys, a question I could not find anywhere: what are the most relevant hardware components to run Photo and Designer? Specifically:

We all know an SSD is better than a HDD. But how much RAM should we use? The more the better, of course, but is there a limit above it is irrelevant? Such as 16GB, 32GB, 64GB…? Or more is always best?

Regarding CPU. Affinity apps are optimized for how many cores? 4? 6? 8? The more the better? What is more relevant in terms of CPU – frequency or number of cores?

Regarding graphics. Affinity apps take advantage of discrete GPUs? What is preferable, nVidia or AMD? Is the amount of RAM in the graphics card relevant (besides what is needed for a given screen resolution, such as 2K or 4K, of course)? More than 2GB in the card is relevant?

The answer to these questions is greatly appreciated, since I’m about to custom-build a (Windows 10) machine to run Affinity software as well as a video editing tool, and the difference in specs can amount to several hundred euros difference according to the chosen componentes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Staff

Hi aempress,

 

I recommend building your PC to the requirements of your video editing software as this will require the highest level of hardware and this will be above the recommended  Affinity software requirements.

 

Personally if I was building a Pc for video and photo editing I would use the following spec

 

Intel i5 3.2Ghz

32Gb RAM

fast SSD for Windows

1 or 2 Tb hybrid HDD for data storage

Nvidia 1050 or AMD 560 video card

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, DWright said:

Hi aempress,

 

I recommend building your PC to the requirements of your video editing software as this will require the highest level of hardware and this will be above the recommended  Affinity software requirements.

 

Personally if I was building a Pc for video and photo editing I would use the following spec

 

Intel i5 3.2Ghz

32Gb RAM

fast SSD for Windows

1 or 2 Tb hybrid HDD for data storage

Nvidia 1050 or AMD 560 video card

 

I wouldn't. You need an i7 or ideally an i9 as they have hyperthreading for more cores and have faster turbo clocks. For RAM 16GB is plenty. I'd be more concerned about the speed of the them. Get at least 3200mhz DDR4. Am not sure how much Affinity uses the video card. But you'll need one that supports DirectX 11, which cards dating back to around 2012 do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just build the fastest machine you can afford but bear in mind that at the moment there's no official statement optimization hardware-wise of any kind. In fact, even GPUs are not a guarantee of better performance. I tested this myself across different machines ranging from decent, good hardware to very fast combo of CPU-GPU noticing only marginal if not negligible improvement.

That said, devs are working in order to improve the performance of the apps but as you can easily understand there's no ETA.

 

Edit: by the way, GPUs are only used for drawing to the screen, nothing more. It's really a pity, considered how fast and affordable the GPUs have become today and that so many other graphics applications are taking advantage of them, successfully I must add.

Andrew
-
Win10 x64 AMD Threadripper 1950x, 64GB, 512GB M.2 PCIe NVMe SSD + 2TB, dual GTX 1080ti
Dual Monitor Dell Ultra HD 4k P2715Q 27-Inch

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi guys.
I really appreciate your input. However, I still have the same questions! :-)

Mainly:

1) Are Affinity apps are optimized for how many cores? 4? 6? 8?

2) Do Affinity apps take advantage of discrete GPUs? What is preferable, nVidia or AMD? Is the amount of RAM in the graphics card relevant? More than 2GB in the card is relevant?

António

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, aempress said:

Hi guys.
I really appreciate your input. However, I still have the same questions! :-)

Mainly:

1) Are Affinity apps are optimized for how many cores? 4? 6? 8?

2) Do Affinity apps take advantage of discrete GPUs? What is preferable, nVidia or AMD? Is the amount of RAM in the graphics card relevant? More than 2GB in the card is relevant?

António

 

I have the same questions. Would be great to get devs feedback. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, verysame said:

Edit: by the way, GPUs are only used for drawing to the screen, nothing more. It's really a pity, considered how fast and affordable the GPUs have become today and that so many other graphics applications are taking advantage of them, successfully I must add.

GPU accelerated computing works by offloading computationally intensive tasks to the GPU to take advantage of the massive parallelism of its cores. But that limits its usefulness to iterative tasks that are independent of each another & do not need to be processed sequentially or interactively. As the NVIDIA chart shows, that often is no more than 5% of the code. It is also limited by how much data needs to be offloaded to the GPU to perform the computations, how quickly that can be done, & how quickly the results can be sent back to the CPU for further processing, stored in working memory, or eventually written to a file.

 

In a nutshell, what this means is there are not as many processes that actually benefit from GPU acceleration as one might think -- often, the overhead of moving the data into & out of the GPU's cores would take longer than simply doing everything in the CPU, particularly when the amount of data is large. It also means that the CPU & supporting buss architecture that connects everything together must still be of sufficiently high performance & the OS must provide app access to low level routines that minimize overhead to see any overall performance improvements. Additionally, there must be enough real memory (RAM) installed to handle not just the app's needs but also all the other processes the OS must run concurrently, which will vary depending on the OS version, its configuration, the size of the files & the amount of code that need to be loaded into memory at any one time, & so on.

 

So if you are looking for simple "one size fits all" answers, there aren't any. Some operations will benefit most from a more powerful CPU & others from a more powerful GPU. Some will benefit significantly from more available memory while it won't make any difference for others. What matters most is that no one part of the system causes a bottleneck that prevents the other parts from working at their maximum efficiency.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, R C-R said:

GPU accelerated computing works by offloading computationally intensive tasks to the GPU to take advantage of the massive parallelism of its cores. But that limits its usefulness to iterative tasks that are independent of each another & do not need to be processed sequentially or interactively. As the NVIDIA chart shows, that often is no more than 5% of the code. It is also limited by how much data needs to be offloaded to the GPU to perform the computations, how quickly that can be done, & how quickly the results can be sent back to the CPU for further processing, stored in working memory, or eventually written to a file.

 

In a nutshell, what this means is there are not as many processes that actually benefit from GPU acceleration as one might think -- often, the overhead of moving the data into & out of the GPU's cores would take longer than simply doing everything in the CPU, particularly when the amount of data is large. It also means that the CPU & supporting buss architecture that connects everything together must still be of sufficiently high performance & the OS must provide app access to low level routines that minimize overhead to see any overall performance improvements. Additionally, there must be enough real memory (RAM) installed to handle not just the app's needs but also all the other processes the OS must run concurrently, which will vary depending on the OS version, its configuration, the size of the files & the amount of code that need to be loaded into memory at any one time, & so on.

 

So if you are looking for simple "one size fits all" answers, there aren't any. Some operations will benefit most from a more powerful CPU & others from a more powerful GPU. Some will benefit significantly from more available memory while it won't make any difference for others. What matters most is that no one part of the system causes a bottleneck that prevents the other parts from working at their maximum efficiency.

 

Very thorough response! Smart. Still leaves me wondering if Affinity software takes full advantage of increased core count. I know on my i7 it's using all four cores but you can get relatively affordable CPUs for consumers now up to a staggering 16 cores! Would Affinity significantly benefit from that? Or is it more about individual core speed?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is more about all the individual operations being performed than anything else. Some will use more cores when no other processes with higher priorities are using them, some won't. It is somewhat like multi-threading, another form of parallelism. Some operations can benefit from multi-threading because their threads can be programmed to run independently of the others but when they can't, the the slowest thread(s) will dictate how quickly the operation can be completed before the next one can begin.

 

Of course, it is really much more complicated than that, but the point is there is always much more going on in the system than just the operation(s) initiated by any one app, & the OS controls how much CPU time each of them gets. The same thing applies for memory allocation & every other system resource. It isn't like the old days when the primitive OS's of that era relied on cooperative multitasking that gave nearly unlimited control over system resources to each app in turn. Now everything relies on preemptive multitasking strictly controlled by the OS. Among other things, that's why apps can crash without bringing down the whole system.

 

I have no idea what the maximum number of cores the Affinity apps could use, but I doubt any process can use all of them for more than very brief intervals, & only a few processes could even do that.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, R C-R said:

I have no idea what the maximum number of cores the Affinity apps could use, but I doubt any process can use all of them for more than very brief intervals, & only a few processes could even do that.

Well, but that was one of my main questions - and still is. Look: there are games, for instance, that are specifically optimized to run on one, two or more cores. Even Photoshop has functions that take advantage of nVidia Quadro graphics boards (http://www.nvidia.com/object/adobe-photoshop-cc.html).
I *really* appreciate all your input, but I would also *REALLY* liked to know this kind of stuff from the developers of Affinity.

BR,
António

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Games are very different from graphics apps because the latter frequently need to write very large amounts of data back to files with 100% accuracy. Games don't need to do that -- in fact, they don't even have to render everything on screen with pixel for pixel or texel for texel accuracy. Game engines are optimized to do a few things very well but they would not be able to handle the much broader range of things graphics creation apps must be able to do. Where a typical graphics app might have 5% of its code suitable for parallel processing in GPU cores, game engines typically are optimized for much higher percentages.

 

There is no getting around it: the number of CPU cores any general purpose app can use will vary greatly depending on the process, the amount of data that needs to be processed, how much of it can be offloaded to the GPU, how many other processes the OS runs concurrently independently of or as a service provided to the app, the amount of RAM the OS allows the app to use, & all the rest of it.

 

So while the developers might be willing to give you a maximum number of cores the Affinity apps can use under ideal conditions, it would come with so many qualifiers & caveats that it would just about meaningless. If you want to configure a system to maximize its performance with Affinity, you have to consider it from a systems standpoint, which means considering everything that contributes to that, not just one "figure of merit" that only applies to a small part of it. That would be like trying to judge how well a car will perform based only on the peak horsepower its engine can develop. It is never that simple.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎28‎/‎10‎/‎2017 at 2:41 PM, R C-R said:

So while the developers might be willing to give you a maximum number of cores the Affinity apps can use under ideal conditions, it would come with so many qualifiers & caveats that it would just about meaningless. If you want to configure a system to maximize its performance with Affinity, you have to consider it from a systems standpoint, which means considering everything that contributes to that, not just one "figure of merit" that only applies to a small part of it. That would be like trying to judge how well a car will perform based only on the peak horsepower its engine can develop. It is never that simple.

Again: I do appreciate your input, but what you are saying can be applied to any software - it is not specific to Affinity. 
I know how to build a powerful machine, with no "weak links". However, this is not when I built a PC to run Windows 95, when I had basically one or two options regarding CPUs and graphic cards were "Windows Accelerators". :-)

We now can opt to buy a CPU with more cores but with less frequency (or vice-versa); we can spend as as little as 50€ or as much as 1,000€ on graphics; and we choose from 8, 16, 32 or even 64 (or more...) GB of RAM. So, as much as I can appreciate some generic tips, I'm here to get some (much more) specific advice.

I just wished someone from Serif could jump into this thread - even if only to confirm what you are saying (which is, "we did not optimize our software for anything in particular, so just go crazy because more is always better")... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aempress said:

Again: I do appreciate your input, but what you are saying can be applied to any software - it is not specific to Affinity. 

Yes it is, which is why I do not understand why you think you need confirmation from Serif that it applies specifically to Affinity.

 

It seems fairly straightforward to me: since we know different processes will benefit more from higher performance in different parts of the system, & there will always be other processes running besides those initiated by any one app, it does not make much sense to try to build a system based only or even mostly on how any one app will perform a few processes in some theoretical 'best case' scenario that is unlikely to occur very often, if ever.

 

Say for example, you got a very 'non-generic' detailed reply from one of the developers that said in part that for some but not all of the adjustments or filters, up to certain pixel dimensions the app could, under best case conditions, benefit more from fewer faster cores but otherwise would benefit more from more slower cores, but that varied depending on the installed RAM, the size of the file(s) open at the time, & other factors. What help would that be to anybody trying to decide what to spend their money on?

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a post where a user was gathering info about the performance of Macro, thus this applied to Affinity Photo. This is what remains of that:

You can see some System configurations we posted there. It might help.

Best regards!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, R C-R said:

It seems fairly straightforward to me: since we know different processes will benefit more from higher performance in different parts of the system, & there will always be other processes running besides those initiated by any one app, it does not make much sense to try to build a system based only or even mostly on how any one app will perform a few processes in some theoretical 'best case' scenario that is unlikely to occur very often, if ever.

OK, simple question: given the same price, should I but a CPU with fewer cores but higher frequency rate or, ON THE CONTRARY, a CPU with more cores but slower frequency?

This is the kind of question that I have been asking from the beginning. If you guys don't know the answer, no problem (I don't know it either!) but please don't pretend you are giving me specific advice, because you are not! ;)

António

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aempress said:

OK, simple question: given the same price, should I but a CPU with fewer cores but higher frequency rate or, ON THE CONTRARY, a CPU with more cores but slower frequency?

Given the same price & the same sized lot, should I build a sprawling ranch style house or a more compact two story one? If they cost the same, should I buy a car with a larger cubic inch displacement engine or a smaller one with a turbocharger? If the rent is the same, should I locate my business in a skyscraper or a mall?

 

Like yours, these are simple questions, but none of them have simple, "one size fits all" answers, other than that it depends on many different factors that won't be the same for everyone. How many different ways must this be stated before you see that? :(

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, aempress said:

OK, simple question: given the same price, should I but a CPU with fewer cores but higher frequency rate or, ON THE CONTRARY, a CPU with more cores but slower frequency?

This is the kind of question that I have been asking from the beginning. If you guys don't know the answer, no problem (I don't know it either!) but please don't pretend you are giving me specific advice, because you are not! ;)

António

 

There is no answer. Sometimes more cores will be better, sometimes higher frequency. It depends on what you are doing at the time.

 

And, you are asking in the wrong place. If you intend to use your PC for video editing, the most important issue is how well the components work for that, not Affinity. I use Cyberlink Powerdirector and checked on their website for recommended video cards etc.

 

For Affinity apps, it wont make that much difference, if any. I have a very fast i7 (7700), lots of memory, a fast graphics card and SSD drive. I also use an elderly i3 with 4GB and no video card. The only time I really notice the difference is launching the program and loading large files, and that is due to the SSD. However, I would not even consider loading Cyberlink on the i3.

 

Decide what video software you will use and look on their website.

Windows PCs. Photo and Designer, latest non-beta versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Staff

Hi aempress,

Affinity apps don't have any specific optimisations in place for any config. The aspects you should take in consideration when buying/building a new PC (for Affinity apps) are the CPU, memory and storage in that order. For heavy workload we do take advantage of a higher number of cores dividing the work between them. For light work the clock speed of each core does affect greatly the performance of the application, so ideally you would want a multi core system with high clock rates. Affinity will take advantage of them depending on what you are doing at the moment. 

Regarding memory, 8 GB RAM are enough but i if you can, get 16 Gb for serious work. You can always install more depending on your needs. A fast SSD for the system is recomended. You can get a secondary drive just for storage. The graphic card is not that important so any modern/decent graphic card will do it. If you will be using the system for video editing (or games, whatever) as well then you should consider the requirements for these apps/games which tend to be higher than for photo editing.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, toltec said:

And, you are asking in the wrong place. If you intend to use your PC for video editing, the most important issue is how well the components work for that, not Affinity. I use Cyberlink Powerdirector and checked on their website for recommended video cards etc.

I mentioned that the machine will also be used for vídeo editing, but its main goal is to run Affinity software.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, MEB said:

Hi aempress,

For heavy workload we do take advantage of a higher number of cores. For light work the clock speed of each core does affect greatly the performance of the application, so ideally you would want a multi core system with high clock rates. Affinity will take advantage of them depending on what you are doing at the moment. 

Thank you. This was the most helpful answer so far! (Y)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, R C-R said:

Like yours, these are simple questions, but none of them have simple, "one size fits all" answers, other than that it depends on many different factors that won't be the same for everyone. How many different ways must this be stated before you see that? :(

Since I don't want a machine to run a word processor, 3D intensive games AND graphics software – but JUST to run graphics software! – I don't think I'm asking for a "one size fits all" answer.
But thanks anyway. And I apologize for bothering you.

Thank you all for your time.

António

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, aempress said:

I mentioned that the machine will also be used for vídeo editing, but its main goal is to run Affinity software.

 

Well, if it is OK for video editing, it will be very good for Affinity software. You would never be able to tell the difference between cores or frequency. Maybe if you used a stopwatch, but if you have time for that, you have time to wait a few extra milliseconds for Affinity to process on a fractionally slower machine ;)

 

My suggestion would be any i5 or i7 with 16gb of RAM and an SSD. Depending on budget. With a graphics card to suit the video editing software. 

 

And bear in mind, whatever you buy will be out of date six months later !

 

Windows PCs. Photo and Designer, latest non-beta versions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 minutes ago, aempress said:

Since I don't want a machine to run a word processor, 3D intensive games AND graphics software – but JUST to run graphics software! – I don't think I'm asking for a "one size fits all" answer.

You are asking us to guess about what tasks you will be doing with the graphics software; how often you will be doing each of them; the typical pixel dimensions, number of layers, raster, text, & vector objects your projects will include; what your budget is now & in the immediate future; & several other factors. All of them will play a part in determining what is the 'best fit' configuration to maximize performance for your particular needs, even if you never run any other software (which will never happen in the real world if you use Windows or any other modern OS).

 

If that is not equivalent to asking for a "one size fits all" answer, then nothing is.

All 3 1.10.8, & all 3 V2.4.1 Mac apps; 2020 iMac 27"; 3.8GHz i7, Radeon Pro 5700, 32GB RAM; macOS 10.15.7
Affinity Photo 
1.10.8; Affinity Designer 1.108; & all 3 V2 apps for iPad; 6th Generation iPad 32 GB; Apple Pencil; iPadOS 15.7

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • 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.