Bad Photos Performance with Large Library?

Discussion in 'Mac Apps and Mac App Store' started by rhyzome, Apr 8, 2015.

  1. rhyzome macrumors regular

    Apr 2, 2012
    Compared to Aperture, I think Photos is really straining my mid 2014 rMBP 15" 1TB 16GB ram 2.5 Ghz.

    The fans have gone on several times and the CPU usage is routinely around 250%, its energy impact shows up in activity monitor as around 350.

    Library size is 17,500, 82.5 GB.
    (Used to be slightly smaller in GBs in Aperture... (like 77GB).

    Anyone experiencing similar issues?

    Is Photos just not good for a library this size? Should I be using LR or something?

    (I know I'm late in this discussion; I wimped out using the Photos beta because I was afraid it would mix up the dates of my photos as Aperture was sometimes doing, or otherwise dis-organize my library...)
  2. netnothing macrumors 68040


    Mar 13, 2007
    I'm wondering the same thing.....but my library is 375GB as so far I'm not impressed with Photos compared to Aperture. The ONLY reason I used Aperture was to be able to handle the large library. I didn't use all the advanced tools. Just that iPhoto couldn't handle the library that large.

    I'm wondering if Photos is the same way.

  3. kieru macrumors newbie

    Apr 9, 2015
    Wow... drastically different experience than my own, but I'm also on a more powerful system (iMac Retina, 32GB RAM). Right now I have Photos open in the background, passively uploading some 1200 files to iCloud.

    %CPU is fluctuating between 0.0% and 1.1% for Photos, 0.1% for Photos Agent with similarly low numbers for its Energy Impact.

    Some things to consider:

    • Your library is MASSIVE; if it's uploading that many files to iCloud I could see the program using up more RAM or CPU time while it finishes that process.
    • The larger you want your preview thumbnails to be, the more processing power it's going to take. This can also be GPU intensive so if you don't have a dedicated graphics card you're going to take a hit in performance (I think the rMBP has an option for that, but it's hella expensive)

Share This Page