Performance question

Hello folks,
so don’t get me wrong. I’m very happy with Krita so far for the fact that it’s free and people are making an effort to optimize it. I use it very much…blider are still to come

But why does it need so much computing power or why is it so slow? If you compare it to PS or CSP, the functions move, resize, cut, paste, etc… it only takes 5 or more seconds for the picture to fit where it should.
What is it that makes this so?

Warm greetings

Krita’s code is open, you can try to find origin of the problem

PS and CSP have closed source code, so it’s not possible to determinate how they do to get fast operations

Krita is made by 9~10developpers with a very low budget
PS and CSP are made by Big compagny, with armies of developpers, and a budget that might be 10 or 100x higher than Krita’s budget

Krita is made ton run on Linux, Windows, MacOS, Android (and I think it’s already running unofficially on BSD)
PS and CSP only have to take care to Windows and MacOS

On my side I don’t have any more Idea about origin of this differences


1 Like

I thought so, maybe it will work in the near future =) the “pencil” brushes are awesome, I haven’t found any comparable ones… it’s great fun to paint with them

Fingers crossed

What is size of the document you are using? What are the specs of your computer. Have you checked the performance tab in krita settings you can increase the size of the ram alloted to it.

While benchmarking what kind of brushee did you use in csp and photoshop. For me some brushes in csp also lag.

There is always room for improvement but it will take time in krita development.

Move tool actually shifts pixels so it is slower than transform tool.

1 Like

That’s strange
For me a simple move should be faster than a transform… :thinking:



+1, performance is oddly weak there. Seems like it should just be “draw rectangular subimage at X,Y” and this performance is affected even without layers above the current one, so it’s not an expensive redraw issue in that sense. Maybe the skew/rotate/scaling is always being calculated even when nothing changes there, or maybe it just moves on a short timer instead of ASAP. Not sure as I’m not familiar with the code

1 Like

For big objects move tool is slower atleast in my experience and from what I know by reading on forums. It is because it renders it while you move. Transform tool works with a low scale preview


Even rendering that ought to be blindingly fast with hardware acceleration in ~2020s. 1k x 1k shouldn’t lag if using the GPU unless on a slow computer. Move tool seems slow even with small images. I’m really curious, now

1 Like

Krita doesn’t use gpu. It only uses gpu for canvas rendering but not calculation and other operation. Perhaps if you are a developer we would really appreciate any help


The document is 4961*7016 - 300DPI

ImageSize 2.8GB
Layers 2.4GB
projections 402 MIB

Memory Used 2, GIB / 40 GIB
Image Data 2.7 / 40 GIB

I9-9900/K 8 core
Asus 3060 Dual 12GB
Gigabyte Gaming 390X motherboard
work in 4K

SwapFile - Size Limit 64 GIB

I’m working on a layer, if I change the size there and press enter, the image disappears for a few seconds and only then is it displayed in the correct size.
Or saving also takes a long time, these operations are by far much shorter in CSP or PS.

I had files in PS that were about 2 GB… and it ran a lot more smoothly.

But it has to be said that if you have a touch tablet the controls are much better than in CSP or PS, kudos.

one pic:

The transform tool doesn’t compute the layer stack as opposed to the move tool, so the move tool should be faster. You can check this by moving an object that is above and below others. With the transform tool it is rendered on top, also without blend modes, I think.

If only AMD, NVidia and Intel were to put a developer on GPU tasks like they occasionally do for Blender…

The latest iteration of transform tool has support to show preview with compositing too

Do you use the same dimension in csp and photoshop?
I can understand the slowdown with that big size of canvas

Have you checked the performance section in krita settings?

What performance should I check? I wrote everything you wanted to know.
What do you mean exactly?

and YES, I had larger files in CSP and PS and there are zero problems with that

If you go to krita settings there is a performance tab where you can assign more ram to krita. It may or may not help to increase it a bit since you have that much ram.

In any case yes photoshop and csp are really great in the speed and optimizations, let’s hope we get there some day. For now people can use photoshop and csp for speed.

Sorry for repeated questions I was just curious about the file dimension. I too work with file size close to 15k x15k illustration but it is for outdoor billboard adverts. And it obviously lags a bit at that dimension.


Let’s hope indeed ;o;

I routinely work with 600dpi A5~B5 comic spreads (approx 9k x 6k pixels), and even in greyscale this can get slow, especially for larger painting operations. For colour it’s extra nasty, especially since colour often involves using large textured brushes. I’d really like to move all my work from PS to Krita, particularly since Krita runs natively on Linux while PS (and CSP) does not.

Maybe more A3@600dpi than A5…? :thinking:

On my side A4@600dpi is smooth on my laptop…
Need to use my desktop for heavy filters/layer style operation, but it’s usually Ok.

One thing: I can’t compare with proprietary software as i don’t have them :slight_smile:


The number I gave is for B5, and as I mentioned, these are spreads (so twice as wide), and with bleed, so the actual documents are larger than B5.
Here’s what that is without bleed, and only one page:

GPU painting was asked for a lot of times but the developers explained that copying data from RAM to Graphics Memory and back completely offsets the performance boost it would give, among other issues it would have (like suddenly your memory limit is that of the graphics card which is normally less).

1 Like