Hey people,

I'm not sure if this is known solution, so don't stone me if it has been posted already.
I'm using Krita on two computers (old laptop and mid-range desktop), both using Windows 8.1. On both of these machines, Krita's been performing very slow, starting up + creating new document took 20+ seconds, it was freezing when working with layers, etc. I've tried every solution I could find, with no luck.
Then I realized I have Krita installed on an SSD on both of my computers. I gave it a shot, reinstalled it on HDD and to my surprise it worked! I did the same on my laptop, and it worked there as well.
Now Krita is starting/creating new document under 2 seconds, even on my laptop's old 5400 RPM HDD. During painting I haven't noticed any slowdown or freezing since reinstall.

TL;DR: If you're using Krita on an SSD, give it a shot and try to reinstall it to HDD. There's a good chance it'll work for you too.

This might be a hint to the devs as well, as Krita for some reason hates SSDs.

TheAviot, cool trick.
Boot time and creation of document time went down from aprox. 16 sec, to 10 sec. But yep, it should be in reverse and it should take around 4sec on sdd.

Erm... I don't think I can explain that! I do have several test laptops with just an ssd, but I mostly use the big desktop with a real hard disk. I'll see if I can see any difference myself.

On starting, Krita needs to read a lot of small files, and Windows' file system is notoriously slow. And, of course, reading/writing to swap memory also uses the disk. But ssd's ought to be faster.

boudewijn wrote:Erm... I don't think I can explain that! I do have several test laptops with just an ssd, but I mostly use the big desktop with a real hard disk. I'll see if I can see any difference myself.

On starting, Krita needs to read a lot of small files, and Windows' file system is notoriously slow. And, of course, reading/writing to swap memory also uses the disk. But ssd's ought to be faster.

Well, maybe it has little to do with being on an SSD, but more of being on the same disk as the swap file.

I see this is an older topic .... but I’m interested to hear if things have changed with modern SSD’s?
And from others experience ... does Krita perform better on a mechanical HD than if installed on an SSD?
Generally from what I’ve read regarding photoshop, they say if you have an SSD, it’s best to keep both the app and the scratch disc on the same SSD... wondering about Krita?

I think it's impossible for Krita to be faster on spinning rust than on an ssd. And as for keeping the app and the tmp files on the same ssd -- once the app has started, it doesn't need much if anything from the installation, and only then the tmp files are coming into play, so that sounds wrong to me as well.

boudewijn wrote:I think it's impossible for Krita to be faster on spinning rust than on an ssd. And as for keeping the app and the tmp files on the same ssd -- once the app has started, it doesn't need much if anything from the installation, and only then the tmp files are coming into play, so that sounds wrong to me as well.

Well yes I’m was surprised to read this as I expected Krita and any app to be better on an SSD, ... this I’m queuing more into it, wondering if others have had similar experiences as original poster?

So, if I only have one SSD, you saying it’s not ideal to have created Krita on same SSD as it’s scratch memory? Maybe Krita is very different in how it works, but for information .... Here’s a quote from Adobe.Help ... regarding PS of course.
Just thought it would be similar for Krita, but maybe I’m wrong

If your startup disk is a hard disk, as opposed to a solid-state disk (SSD), try using a different hard disk for your primary scratch disk. An SSD, on the other hand, performs well as both the primary startup and scratch disk. In fact, using an SSD is probably better than using a separate hard disk as your primary scratch disk.

And link to page ..
https://helpx.adobe.com/africa/photoshop/using/scratch-disks-preferences.html#adjust-scratch-disk-preferences

The quote from Adobe doesn't say anything about things being better when the app and the temp folder are on the same ssd or not; it says a hard drive isn't a good choice for a temp folder.

In the end, it just plain cannot make any difference whatsoever -- Krita starts faster from an SSD, the temp files are faster on an SSD. It doesn't matter whether Krita is on the same SSD as the temp files or not, and on a spinning hard drive everything will always be slower.

Huh? But the underlined bit, doesn’t it say just that?? Maybe somehow how I’m misunderstanding that then hmm 🤔

fact, using an SSD is probably better than using a separate hard disk as your primary scratch disk

> using an SSD is probably better than using a separate hard disk as your primary scratch disk

I believe that what they're saying is "it's better to use SSD, even if it's the same one you have your system on, than a separate hard drive that is HDD. However if you have only HDD disks, then use one for system/installed program, and another, separate one for temp files/scratch disk" (which is probably a solution/work-around to beat the slowness of spinning HDD. I'm not sure about the validity of this advice, so I won't talk about it. But the first sentence is for sure true, SSD is just always faster).

Everything related to hard drives is faster on SSD, although with Krita, if you install it on SSD, then the *startup* will be faster than if you installed it on HDD, and if you keep swap file on SSD (swap file location: Configure Krita -> Performance -> Swap File Path), then Krita will be faster than if it was on HDD *only* after it starts swapping. Krita starts swapping when it doesn't fit in RAM (inside the limits defined in Performance). What will be also faster is saving images to and loading from SSD. To sum up: if you have all hard drives HDD, then if you are patient enough to go through startup of Krita, and then you make sure your images fit inside RAM available for Krita, then the only performance issues will rise during saving and loading images.

tymond wrote:> using an SSD is probably better than using a separate hard disk as your primary scratch disk

I believe that what they're saying is "it's better to use SSD, even if it's the same one you have your system on, than a separate hard drive that is HDD. However if you have only HDD disks, then use one for system/installed program, and another, separate one for temp files/scratch disk" (which is probably a solution/work-around to beat the slowness of spinning HDD. I'm not sure about the validity of this advice, so I won't talk about it. But the first sentence is for sure true, SSD is just always faster).

Everything related to hard drives is faster on SSD, although with Krita, if you install it on SSD, then the *startup* will be faster than if you installed it on HDD, and if you keep swap file on SSD (swap file location: Configure Krita -> Performance -> Swap File Path), then Krita will be faster than if it was on HDD *only* after it starts swapping. Krita starts swapping when it doesn't fit in RAM (inside the limits defined in Performance). What will be also faster is saving images to and loading from SSD. To sum up: if you have all hard drives HDD, then if you are patient enough to go through startup of Krita, and then you make sure your images fit inside RAM available for Krita, then the only performance issues will rise during saving and loading images.

Yes that’s pretty much how I understood it ... but what I thought “they” (Adobe) were saying, was that if one has a SSD, then it’s better to just simply have the scratch on the same as the Apps and OS, rather than on a separate drive(even another SSD) ... but maybe I did get that wrong.
So are you saying it’s best to have a 2nd SSD externally or internally as ones primary scratch, rather than on the same SSD as Krita/apps and OS?

And regarding the original poster ... the HDD working better than SSD for Krita ... to confirm, not true?

And regarding the original poster ... the HDD working better than SSD for Krita ... to confirm, not true?

Hi, OP here, just got the email notification and had to make a new account.

Anyways, I remember this issue purely being related to the Windows version, the Linux version always worked as it should on an SSD.

Alexie wrote:

And regarding the original poster ... the HDD working better than SSD for Krita ... to confirm, not true?

Hi, OP here, just got the email notification and had to make a new account.

Anyways, I remember this issue purely being related to the Windows version, the Linux version always worked as it should on an SSD.

Ah, that’s interesting and good to know, thanks for popping in and clarifying