Hello, for krita is it better for the cpu to have more memory or have less memory but a bit more performance ? Knowing that there will be not GPU added (last time because of the wayland dependencies, having a graphics card created a clash and regulary planted the computer).
These are not mutually exclusive. Krita likes CPU power for faster painting and other operations and more memory (RAM) lets you work on larger files. GPU is not used for anything but making the canvas rotation and zoom a little smother. Having more RAM does not make the CPU slower or anything.
2 Likes
Krita benefits greatly from RAM. For many operations, single-core performance is still more important than multi-core performance, but more functions are being optimized for multi-core operations, so I think that over time there will be a significant shift towards parallelization. Currently, the GPU is mainly used to paint the images on the canvas, so a pure Krita PC does not need a super gaming GPU, which would be a waste of money. It is better to get “something small” for casual gamers or a good office GPU and invest the money saved in RAM and/or CPU. However, developments are also underway or being evaluated to make their computing power usable for Krita.
The only “excuse” for a high-end gaming GPU is the desire to use AI image generators. For AI-based cropping tools, average upper-class (not high-end) GPUs should be more than sufficient. When it comes to AI, it makes sense to rely on NVIDIA GPUs, as they are used by almost all tools. With AMD and Intel, you often find yourself standing at the door and not getting in. 
I would therefore look for a PC with at least an 8-core CPU that has very good single-core performance and decent multi-core performance. It should have at least 32 GB of RAM, but preferably 64 GB or even more.
ATTENTION! When it comes to RAM, you have to make sure that the motherboard’s memory controller can manage it. Today, every memory controller should be able to handle 32 GB, and almost all of them can handle 64 GB, but 128 GB is usually the limit for consumer motherboards, and you will need either server boards or high-end gaming boards if you want more memory. ¹
Most hobby painters will be satisfied with 64 GB, but if you constantly work with a lot of layers, very large canvases, 16-bit or 32-bit color depth, and perhaps even animation, then you will most likely want more than 64 GB.
Michelist
¹ Therefore, always check BEFOREHAND what the controller can manage in terms of RAM. By the way, you should also keep this in mind if you want to upgrade your PC again in the future. Because if you planned upgrading your PC at a later date, a motherboard with a maxed-out memory controller may now be €20 cheaper than planning ahead and choosing a motherboard with a larger memory controller. However, the additional costs for a new motherboard can be enormous if you need a new motherboard for a memory upgrade and there are no longer any boards available that support your CPU socket. If you then also have to buy a new CPU and other components, this can quickly lead to additional costs of €300 to €500.
I myself have a 15-year-old HP Z620 workstation, which 13 years ago got more memory and an additional mainboard-riser-card with another CPU socket and more RAM-Sockets, plus two new XEON E5-2643 v2 @ 3.50GHz CPUs. It has 24 cores (2 6-core CPUs with Hyper-Threading) and 96 GB RAM, plus a Radeon RX 580 OC with 8 GB RAM, and I have always been more than satisfied with this system. It used to be a computing monster, but unfortunately its performance has declined significantly as the electronics are failing here and there. However, it is still running, and since I cannot afford a replacement, I am concerned about the day when it will no longer be able to function. I now believe that I will have to ask for support here in the forum so that I can continue to support others, because my living circumstances (nursing home resident, bedridden) and my income situation are not conducive to saving money or earning extra income.
I also ran tests with Krita in SUSE Linux VMs, where I allocated 2, 4, 6, and 16 CPUs to Krita, with 64 GB of RAM for each VM, and I tested the same SUSE Linux VMs with 8 and 16 cores as well as 4, 8, 16, 32, 64 GB RAM, with the same images and tasks. The reduction/increase in available memory is most noticeable, allowing you to massively influence Krita’s performance when editing large images that contain performance-hungry gimmicks.
Regarding the CPU influence tests: No one wants to work with 2 CPUs, with 4 well, if there’s no other option, but with 6 or more it starts to be fun – and strangely enough, even though it is said that Krita mainly needs high single-core performance.
Regarding the RAM impact tests: If you go ahead and add memory to the 8 or 16 core VMs, you’ll feel Krita learn to “fly.” The more, the faster/higher.
Add/Edit: Footnote Âą reworded, as it was originally very confusing.
2 Likes
Thanks for yours kinds answers. I learned a great deal.
The mother board of my old computer came back to life and since he have more ram but less power, I was wondering if going back to it for krita was better or not.
Having not interest in a gaming computer or AI it’s good to know I will not need in the future to scraps for buying a gpu (with how bad thing turned out with a office one, just knowing I don’t need it make me pretty happy).
Thanks again for your answer.
Currently, every GPU that has: OpenGL 3.0 or higher / Direct3D 11, according to the Krita homepage, is sufficient. That will be all cards not older than ~8 years.
But should you use your PC also for surfing or maybe want to watch 3D video, you may want a card able to provide that functionality (3D).
Another reason not to go for the absolute cheapest graphics cards, is the fact that display-resolutions get higher and higher and the possible wish to connect more than one display counts to it too.
Should mean: If you want to add more displays or exchange the existing one(s) with displays offering higher resolutions in the future, it may be a good idea to check the available ports/interfaces (VGA/DVI > both better not these days)/HDMI/DisplayPort and the maximum possible resolution (displays combined) the graphics card can handle.
The next thing to consider can be:
If you already have (a) High Resolution display(s) or think about buying one or more of them for your PC, then the card should be able to handle this. Although there is the possibility to add a second graphics card to some mainboards, which then allows adding more displays or raising the resolution, but then you should stay with the same graphic chip manufacturer although mixing is possible but brings larger disadvantages, it would be better in most cases to go for a single card that is able to handle all your needs in resolution and available interfaces.
Michelist
1 Like