Efficiency question

LH
Posted By
Linda_Hirsch
Nov 4, 2005
Views
515
Replies
17
Status
Closed
Usually I’m at 100% efficiency (have 2GB Ram)

But sometimes I look at and it says 38%, and only one image up, and not many heavy other apps running. What the deal on that. any ideas appreciated. thanks.

How to Improve Photoshop Performance

Learn how to optimize Photoshop for maximum speed, troubleshoot common issues, and keep your projects organized so that you can work faster than ever before!

Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 4, 2005
Check the help file for details on efficiency. If I recall correctly, it has to do with the frequency with which PS has to read/write to the scratch file.
MD
Michael_D_Sullivan
Nov 5, 2005
Low efficiency means you are using virtual memory (Windows pagefile) because not enough RAM is available to the program.
LH
Linda_Hirsch
Nov 5, 2005
Yeah, I know all that, thanks.
Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 5, 2005
Then what exactly is it you do not know?

And, from the help file…

Efficiency Displays the percentage of time spent performing an operation instead of reading or writing to the scratch disk. If the value is below 100%, Photoshop is using the scratch disk and is therefore operating more slowly.
LH
Linda_Hirsch
Nov 6, 2005
Ok I know all that. What I don’t understand is why most of the time at 100%, and then one day I’m at 38%, and to my mind, not much going on is different. thanks.
Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 6, 2005
Ah. So you "know all that" but don’t understand it. It means that in any workflow there are variables. To compensate for those variables, photoshop needs to write information into the scratch disk. One of the variables is available RAM. When you use too much available ram, photoshop doesn’t shut down, it writes to the scratch disk. Every time it does this may be construed as a measure of efficiency. "How many times do I have to write to the scratch disk?"

So every image is different, everything you do to different images is different. Therefore sometimes what you have to do will remain at 100% efficiency, and other times, PS will have to write to the scratch disk more heavily and you will get a different (38%) efficiency.
DM
dave_milbut
Nov 6, 2005
linda, what’s your memory percentage set to in preferences. with 2 gig of ram you should be able to get it up to at least 80% i think… maybe a mite more…
JJ
John Joslin
Nov 6, 2005
There’s a reason why most cars don’t have an oil pressure gauge any more. B)
Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 6, 2005
with 2 gig of ram you should be able to get it up to at least 80% i think

Dave, it is not clear that she is saying that it is always at 38%. Sometimes it is. That, in and of itself is not noteworthy, IMO. If you have a 1 gig image with 300 layers, and are editing with a clone tool, I absolutely would not be surprised for effieciency to take a hit. So I’m not sure what you’re trying to "fix". Is there a problem?

I just don’t get it.

John,

Spot on, IMO.
DM
dave_milbut
Nov 6, 2005
‘course you’re right, a lot depends on the actal image, but speaking in generalities (is that a word?<g>) if she’s stll at the installation default of 55%, she can probably afford to bump that up an decrease the likelyhood of swapping… generally. 🙂
Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 6, 2005
I’ve edited this reply like four times now. Let’s leave it at a <nod>, I gotcha.

Peace,
Tony
DM
dave_milbut
Nov 6, 2005
careful of whiplash! 🙂
C
chrisjbirchall
Nov 6, 2005
generalities (is that a word?

it is now! <g>
LH
Linda_Hirsch
Nov 7, 2005
thanks. I have it at 55%. it was at 70%, but read a Bruce Fraser post that said that could be too much, ie, starving the OS of Ram so I lowered it. But 38% efficiency, when I don’t have any other image up? don’t get it.
Y
YrbkMgr
Nov 7, 2005
But 38% efficiency, when I don’t have any other image up? don’t get it.

It depends on the image and what you’re doing. I mean seriously – how many layers is it composed of? What is the bit depth? Are you running filters?

The Efficiency is a dynamic number. So if it’s 38% now, it may be 100% in 10 minutes, depending on what you’re going to do and the image composition.

Seriously Linda, I don’t understand what you don’t get. Reads and writes to the hard drive is what you’re measuring here. That’s what efficiency is telling you. Is your point that it shouldn’t have to write to the hard drive?
MD
Michael_D_Sullivan
Nov 7, 2005
If you don’t get it, don’t monitor it. Do you monitor your blood ketone level or your words read per day? There are statistics you don’t need to know about. And if you don’t need to monitor your efficiency, why are you doing so?
LH
Linda_Hirsch
Nov 8, 2005
thanks Tony, that puts it in perspective a bit. thanks Michael, good points philosophical.

MacBook Pro 16” Mockups 🔥

– in 4 materials (clay versions included)

– 12 scenes

– 48 MacBook Pro 16″ mockups

– 6000 x 4500 px

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections