You should notice the biggest difference in tasks like exporting and generating previews, but when navigating around the Library and Develop modules there is very little difference. With your CPU having 6 cores and 12 threads, running all of those is apparently better than just running the 6 cores without HT/SMT. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark result/analysis sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion section. One note of caution, GPUs come either integrated/built in or separate/discrete. If Intel hadn't decided to launch the even faster Core i9 9900K, this would have been the fastest CPU we have ever tested for Photoshop. However, if we dig into the results a bit deeper, we find that most of this performance advantage comes from passive tasks like exporting and generating previews. Also there is a difference in that the lower spec machine has the Radeon Pro 5300M graphics while the other has the 5500M. Is it possibble to know average CPU utilization during the test? I tried the CPU in stock config, then in PBO, overclock, etc. 90% sure. The 9th gen chips have a higher stock turbo compared to the 8700k, but other reviews have found that the 9th gen 8-core chips also run significantly hotter, which reduces maximum overclocking potential. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Still, I quickly tested a Geometry test with an Auto Mask layered A7RIII image with SMT ON and OFF. For reasons, I prefer to buy a Mac over a Windows PC (advertising ID, rest of family on Apple, iMessage, etc) I turned SMT off and my test export/save time set a new shortest time record. It’s i3 vs i5 vs i7 vs i9! Lightroom Classic CC is much better at using a higher number of CPU cores than its predecessor, but for many tasks the speed of each core is often more important than the total number of cores. My all 16 core, 32 thread SMT ON setup result is so slow that it is roughly on par with 4 cores, 8 thread setting. Feel free to skip to the next section for our analysis of these results. While our benchmark presents various scores based on the performance of each type of task, we also wanted to provide the individual results in case there is a specific task someone may be interested in. What mac should I get mainly for using Lightroom,Photoshop and PremierePro ? Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. Benchmark Analysis: Intel Core 10th Gen vs AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen. How does Intel 10th Gen stack up overall? Puget's testing methodology is a bit problematic because they are comparing a 4.3ghz 8700k against a 4.7ghz 9700k. I know we usually test on 64 GB systems here at Puget. Never tested the new RAM with the pre-update Adobe. Je suis en réflexion pour me monter une tour PC pour mes retouches photos (Photoshop) et tris/archives (Lightroom). Open to suggestions. ), Very interesting.I have made some tests om my PCSystem:Ryzen 3600 CPUAsus TUF B450-Pro Gaming motherboardZalman CNPS 14X cooler,Samsung 850 pro 250 GB SSDRAM: 1x HyperX DDR4-3333 16384MB PC4-26660 PredatorLatest Lightroom Classic 9.3, Export 180 pictures with adjustments - - with HT/SMT off takes 5 minutes 29 seconds. If there is a specific task that is a hindrance to your workflow, examining the raw results for that task is going to be much more applicable than the scores that our benchmark calculated. However, I personally think that the ideal situation will be when Intel is putting out CPUs that offer maximum performance without needing any more overclocking. I think that Jay may have received a golden sample, and he said so himself towards the end of the video. I bought this laptop 2 months ago (i7 9750H, 16GB, 512GB SSD, OLED 4K), my main use is for photography (Photoshop and Lightroom) and coming from an old Precision M4600 the difference is amazing. This is frequent with new hardware generations, but appears to be more of an issue right now than I remember in years past. much better at using a higher number of CPU cores, Samsung 960 Pro 1TB M.2 PCI-E x4 NVMe SSD, performs in other applications like Photoshop, Best Workstation PC for Adobe Lightroom Classic (Winter 2020), Adobe Lightroom Classic: AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, 3080 & 3090 Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 & 3090 Performance, Best Workstation PC for V-Ray (Winter 2020), SOLIDWORKS 2020 SP5 AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Best Workstation PC for Metashape (Winter 2020), Agisoft Metashape 1.6.5 SMT Performance Analysis on AMD Ryzen 5000 Series, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core 10th Gen vs AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Threadripper 3990X 64 Core, What is the Best CPU for Photography (2019), Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, Lightroom Classic CC 2018: Core i7 9700K & i9 9900K Performance. That way, anytime you launch Lightroom it can automatically have the affinity set to leave 1 or 2 cores unused for multitasking. Esp. Before undervolting the … Looking at how the Intel 10th Gen processors compare against a wider range of CPUs, there are a couple of key points we want to note: First, compared to the previous 9th Gen processors, we are looking at about a 3-7% performance gain with the new 10th Gen models. I'm on a 2016 Macbook Pro w/ 16G RAM and LR can be so slow as to be unusable at times, esp. Interesting, Jayz2cents had much better results oc'ing the 9900K compared to the 8700K: https://youtu.be/9yQRmbe2QPU. My Ryzen 3950x is exporting images from Lightroom much slower recently using all 16 cores than using just 8 cores. (My absolute best time running my test batch yesterday came using Camera Raw rolled back to 12.2.1, 16 cores, no SMT. I am currently looking for a new computer and don't know which CPU to take. XMP profiles don't always properly set from what I've experienced. I NEVER delete anything. But... the last couple versions of Lightroom Classic do much better with SMT/HT on for most of the "active" tasks like applying brushes, scrolling through images, etc. We did some comparison testing with a Z390 board and the results were pretty consistent. Puget Systems offers a range of poweful and reliable systems that are tailor-made for your unique workflow. Meanwhile, the Core i9 version nailed a 19,516, making it 9.4 percent faster than the Core i7. The graphs below compare the most important i9-9900K and Intel i7-8700 features. Or the Adobe update screwed up something (sometimes they're 2 steps froward, 1 step back)? I understand your reasoning about the new CPUs having better thermal interface, which I guess they need because the run hotter. So I went from 4:45 to about 7 minutes right after the RAM switch. Thank you! Temperatures are about 8 degrees lower than when running only 8 cores. https://feedback.photoshop....I understand, it's rather atypical issue, but may be really architecture of this Ryzen processors such, that they show this results, as in your benchmark, and in the same time remains 10-20-30% unused CPU power.if this assumption (partially) true, it can change dramatically CPU preferences. When I ran your Photoshop benchmark a few months ago, I achieved a score of 1062, which is not far behind your score for a stock 9700k. So could it be because of going from 4 sticks of ram to 2? If you got the same time with 24 files, then there is probably a difference in export settings. Passant à des tests réels, nous n'avons constaté aucune différence dans Lightroom d'Adobe. If you export an unusually high number of images every day and have the budget for it, the AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen CPUs (in particular the 3960X) may also be worth a look as they can export images up to 2x faster than a Ryzen processor, but you would likely need to be exporting images for a significant portion of your day for one of those processors to be worth the investment. You might also try setting the RAM timings/frequency/voltage manually if you aren't already. Thank you! To thoroughly test each processor, we will be using two sets of images: one set of 22MP.CR2 RAW images taken on a Canon EOS 5D Mark III and a set of 45MB .NEF RAW images taken on a Nikon D850. Have you watched memory usage during the benchmark at all? While a GPU may slow things down a bit, it is nothing like in a memory intensive game where you would literally hate your gameplay experience. To start off our analysis of the Intel 10th Gen desktop processors we are going to look at the performance in Lightroom Classic versus AMD's 3rd Gen Ryzen processors. It isn't by a small amount either - AMD can at times be up to 2x faster than a similarly priced Intel CPU! Dropping in another 2 to fill all 4 slots made a huge difference, and reduced the times roughly back to the old, pre-upgrade 4-stick setup (actually a few seconds faster due to the faster RAM speed I guess). Given the three I'm looking at and considering heat, thread, and clockspeed, would you still recommend the i9700? Photoshop Lightroom (standalone) is very slow. But I am worried, that it's not that future safe, since it doesn't offer hyperthreading. Overall, this will likely make the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a more attractive option for most Lightroom Classic users, although if exporting is not at all a problem in your workflow, the Intel 10th Gen processors can be a great choice as well. Hi, may I ask how big was the set of the 5D Mk III RAW files you used for export? Even with SMT ON, I'm back to short export times (or "Save Images" times)! It will be helpful.But my main thought, or assumption was such: May be CPU utilization in AMD Ryzen 2700X during export (which may take many hours for thousands of pictures) not 99%, as in I7 processors (definitely for I7-2600K), but just 60-70-80 % ? At first I wanted to take the i7 8700, but then considered the i7 9700k, because it's so much faster at building smart previews. Rotating, skewing, etc. I have seen issue with Ryzen 1800X, where CPU utilization during export was just about 30%. I work with an external monitor and tried any number of things to speed it up to no avail. With it, you can set the affinity (how many cores it can use), but it also has the option to make it permanent. Even my Dell G5 laptop beats that time (i7-9750H, 6 cores 12 threads, 32Gb 2666 MHz memory). Somewhat slower is the 8 core, 16 thread (that's with SMT ON but manually turning cores off in the "Set Affinity" option in Task Manager). If your workflow includes other software packages (we have similar articles for Premiere Pro, After Effects, and Photoshop), you need to consider how the system will perform in those applications as well. Contrary to William's comment about the 9th gen being able to overclock higher due to having better thermals, testing has shown this not to be the case. I experimented with some settings, and found that if I disable half the cores (for the Adobe app in Windows task manager's "Set Affinity"), speed is mostly back, and time was reduced to 4:50 for the test batch, very close to the original 4:45. This benchmark version includes the ability to upload the results to our online database, so if you want to know how your own system compares, you can download and run the benchmark yourself. **The i9 9900K is 6% faster than the i7 8700K when using Lightroom, but is 15-20% faster in Photoshop in comparison to AMD CPU’s, the 9900K is 20-30% … Maybe the 8700 is still the best bet? Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. Any thoughts on whether the 2.3 ghz 9th generation i9 8 core processors will be worth the extra money over the 2.6 ghz 9th gen i7 6 core processors? Best Workstation PC for Adobe Lightroom Classic (Winter 2020), Adobe Lightroom Classic: AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3070, 3080 & 3090 Performance, Adobe Lightroom Classic - NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 & 3090 Performance, Best Workstation PC for V-Ray (Winter 2020), SOLIDWORKS 2020 SP5 AMD Ryzen 5000 Series CPU Performance, Best Workstation PC for Metashape (Winter 2020), Agisoft Metashape 1.6.5 SMT Performance Analysis on AMD Ryzen 5000 Series, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Threadripper 3990X 64 Core, What is the Best CPU for Photography (2019), Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X, Lightroom Classic CPU Roundup: AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, AMD Threadripper 2, Intel 9th Gen, Intel X-series, Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core 10th Gen vs AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen. These are the four tiers of Intel’s main “Core” processors and are targeted at most desktop PC users, especially builders. If your software benefits from Hyperthreading, the 8700K / 8068K might still be faster than the 9700K - but if not, that is what I'd go for (out of those three options). I did try two earlier versions of ACR (12.1 and 11.4), one earlier version of Photoshop (which was utilizing the aforementioned earlier versions of ACR for the roll-back test), still the same slow speed. During export 12 cores loaded fully on the 99.99% . However, I do understand that Puget are system integrators, and their primary interest is system stability, so it's not likely that they will test under these conditions. So similarly to previous experience here, it looks like the more cores the processor has, beyond a certain number, the more SMT or HT hurts performance. It's odd, but that's what it looks like. Same slow stuff :(. It is technically the fastest CPU we have tested for navigating around the modules and photo merge tasks, but if you are looking for the best export performance you may be better served with a Threadripper 1920X or a Core i9 7900X or higher CPU instead. The TIM is definitely better on the 9th gen, but the thicker silicon with the extra two cores result in overall worse performance. The bulk tasks like exporting and generating smart previews are where we expected these CPUs to shine and while they were ~10% faster than the i7 8700K, we honestly thought we would see a larger difference. One thing we want to note is that the pre-launch motherboards we received from Gigabyte (and multiple other manufacturers) were not using Intel's specified power limits in their default BIOS settings. It shouldn't. I'm not too concerned about the overclocking. So, the i9 with its faster speed and bvecause Lightroom is "intel optimized" (Dont kid yourself, Ligfhroom isnt optimized for anything) or the 50% more cores in a 3900x Since Lightroom tends to value both core count and frequency, these new CPUs should do great but the only way to know for sure is to actually benchmark them and find out. Between AMD and INtel, if you have a similar number of cores I don't think you should see all that different of CPU load unless there is an issue with your system. AMD Ryzen 9 3900X ($499), Intel Core i9 9900K ($488) In my case there seems to be a sweet spot; running 16 cores and no SMT. No change in my test between SMT on or off.) Because on my I7 I can't do anything like Photoshop during export, because it's too slowly; when I have to do something heavy during export, I have manually reduce core utilization for Lightroom for 1 or 2 core. I'd recommend going for an 8th gen i3 or i5 paired with a dedicated graphics card and 16gb of ram. Our Labs team is available to provide in-depth hardware recommendations based on your workflow. Also export, for example 50x jpeg (22 MP .CR2): Ryzen 7 3700X (slower processor) finished in 34.94 second, Ryzen 3800X (faster processor) finished with worse result (35.22 seconds)How it's possible? The Core i9 9900K is approximately 20% more expensive than the Core i7 8700K, but we only saw about a 6% performance increase in Lightroom Classic. Adobe Lightroom Classic is an interesting application when it comes to CPU performance since it has some very interesting performance quirks - chief among them the fact that AMD processors are overwhelming faster than Intel for a number of tasks like exporting and generating smart previews. Any less, like 6 cores (12 threads) or 4 cores (8 threads) yields slower results. With higher-end hardware, it is actually rare to see such a close relationship between an increase in price and the performance gained, which makes the Core i9 … Because it's very, very important - In the time, when Lightroom 5.7.1 utilize I7-2600K on 70-80% during export, Lightroom 7-8 utilize it on 99%. We make copies of the photos so that we have 100 images to export. If you would like to skip over our test setup and benchmark sections, feel free to jump right to the Conclusion. If you are looking for a new workstation at roughly this price point, there is no reason not to use the i9 9700K over the i7 8700K, especially considering how well it performs in other applications like Photoshop. Lightroom is my bottleneck- its soslow its annoying. By reading on this sub about undervolting I thought I'd give it a try and oh my, what a difference it makes! 85 % - with HT/SMT on takes 5 minutes 01 second. So, my question is - how much I will benefit (in terms of exporting time) from upgrading to one of theses cpus? For most users, this makes the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a much better overall choice for a Lightroom Classic workstation. That may take the fun out of things for some people who enjoy overclocking, but the best case situation to me is one in which everyone can get the maximum performance without having to fiddle with motherboard settings :). In real world use, the limiting factor will be thermals for all of these chips, so that will be the most valid comparison. I have BIG catalogs- 30K to 100K images. Can you give me a rough estimate? Also during export 5 cores loaded fully, 6th apr. Is this test relaible? Is there any chance that it's not so much a two versus four sticks of memory issue as it is a 32 versus 64 GB of memory capacity issue? I expect some improvements with the i9 - … We used a value of 125W for the PL1 setting on all three Intel 10th Gen CPUs we tested along with the following PL2 limits according to Intel's specifications: Setting these power limits made our Noctua NH-U12S more than enough to keep these CPUs properly cooled and helps match our philosophy here at Puget Systems of prioritizing stability and reliability over raw performance in our workstations. New ACR version (12.3), new Bridge, etc. I'm wondering if the 8086 is the sweet spot as it may overclock better without the thermal issues, yet is faster than the 8700. I think everybody is happy to take a faster active task set (and slower export) over a fast export and slow(er) active tasks.
For extra performance for editing or even a spot of gaming, an NVIDIA GTX 1650 dedicated graphics card (GPU) with 4GB of VRAM is on offer. Listed below are the specifications of the systems we will be using for our testing: AMD Ryzen 9 3950X ($749) I don't recommend overclocking, but if that is your goal you will have much better results with the 9000 series because of the better thermal interface material it has compared to the 8000 series (including the 8086). You really don't need much for photo editing, running lightroom and/or photoshop requires a decent amount of ram. Wow, 3:30. For these tasks, the Intel 10th Gen processors take the lead with the Intel Core i9 10900K and i5 10700K beating the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X and 3800X by a small 5% respectively. I've just put another 32Gb RAM into my computer, making the total 64Gb, but more importantly, filling all 4 RAM slots again. I could see how it might be unfair if you were trying to compare purely the maximum performance you could get across different CPUs when overclocked to their limits. I really wonder if the Z370 motherboard you used negatively affected the 9th gen results? It looks like that issue was before Lightrooom Classic was launched - they really improved performance in that new version of Lightroom. We may, but Capture One has a very poor API which makes automated testing much more difficult. My understanding that for Lightroom the speed of the processor is important (got that) and that LR does not effectively use multiple cores. Lighter area on the graph corresponds to the number of extra threads, offered by Hyper-Threading technology. Intel Core i7-9700K 3.6GHz / 4.9GHz Turbo, Eight Core –> 132% Intel Core i9-9900K 3.6GHz / 5.0GHz Turbo, Eight Core –> 135% Adobe Creative Cloud Photography Plan In fact, for most users there is little reason to use the more expensive i9 9900K as the i7 9700K is only a tiny bit slower. It may have improved with a version released a few months ago, but with the current version it got worse again, I think. But this was only one quick test, and only some geometry adjustments. (roughly 6:50 vs 4:20).I thought this issue was largely remedied in the 2020 Lightroom but maybe the problem got worse again with the latest update.Anyway, I might have to use SMT off if and when I do a lot of work in Camera Raw (I hardly ever use Lightroom, I work in Camera Raw, opened via Photoshop normally. The 8700k has a stock all-core turbo of 4.3ghz, which means that it actually has significant overclocking headroom. This isn't anything new, but now that Intel is being more aggressive about adding cores and pushing the frequency, this is resulting in much higher power draw (and heat) than you would expect from a 125W processor - often resulting in 100c temperatures after only a few seconds of load. And I just wondering, does the Ryzen R72700X have the same CPU utilization - about 100%, or less (may be 90%..or may be even 80%?). Now, I just need to run a test with SMT OFF and 4 sticks of RAM. Lightroom CC disgustingly slow - old issue, NEED ANSWERS. In fact, for most users there is little reason to use the more expensive i9 9900K as the i7 9700K is only a tiny bit slower. Is the Intel Core i9 9990XE good for Lightroom Classic CC 2019? But I'm not sure if I like the brand new, Lightroom-like ACR UI. Keep an eye out in the coming weeks (or months)! In the module tasks (scrolling through images and switching between the Library and Develop modules), there was surprisingly little difference between all the Intel CPUs we tested, although the AMD CPUs lagged behind just a bit. And saving/export slowed down significantly. in warm weather, the fans go off almost immediately and after 20 min, it can be intolerable. Yea, the SMT/HT thing still exists for exporting and making smart previews. Those that are simply looking to get their export times down as much as possible may want to consider a CPU like the Core i7 7820X or even the Core i9 7900X since they are significantly faster for exporting, but we would consider the Core i7 8700K to be the more balanced option for the average Lightroom user. With the launch of the new 9th Gen Intel Core Processors, Intel has made a number of improvements including a small frequency bump and an increase in core count. I don't use Lightroom, but Adobe Camera RAW only which I'm accessing via Adobe Bridge. It was about 2 min 30 sec faster than with SMT on. Are these 24 files we can see on the LR screenshot? profile (2800 MHz and 3200 MHz respectively), no stability issues. Thanks for pushing so quickly! I've read many reports about the little difference between the i7 and i9 and I have become indecisive. Money/quality wise, of course the most expensive one would be the best. On average, the Core i7 9700K is about 4% faster that the Core i7 8700K in Lightroom Classic. I ordered another 2 sticks of the exact same Vulcan Z memory, since I've been contemplating on having 64 Gb total RAM anyways. if using masks, etc. And it does not matter if I use PBO or not, it's the same time. Je n'ai pas trouvé de réponses concrètes sur le site d'Adobe, ils ne donnent que des configurations "minimales". Thank you for response and advice! will you ever do a Benchmarking for Capture one? Keep in mind that the benchmark results in this article are strictly for Lightroom Classic and that performance will vary widely in different applications. Lightroom Classic CPU performance: Intel Core X-10000 vs AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen. Are the 9th Gen Intel Core Processors good for Lightroom Classic? If you're using software that doesn't utilize hyper-threading well then the 9700K's extra cores and clock speed will make it a better value. GPUs currently come with 2 to 8 GB of RAM. Now equipped with a quad-core CPU, the 2-in-1 can run Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom without breaking a sweat. I work with an external monitor and tried any number of things to speed it up to no avail. However, unlike Photoshop, there is probably no reason to upgrade if you already have an 8700K since you are unlikely to notice a difference unless you are actively benchmarking Lightroom. Not being knowledgable about the difference between an i7 and an i9 processor other that the number of cores they support, would not a 2.6 GHz 6-Core i7 actually be a better choice for LR than a 2.4 GHz 8-Core i9? It's definitely not the 32 vs 64 GB, since my export time before the RAM upgrade was consistently about 4:45 with my 4 x 8 = 32GB setup (4x8Gb Adata XPG Z1 2800 C17). In this article, we will be examining the performance of the new Intel 10th Gen Core i9 10900K, i7 10700K, and i5 10600K in Lightroom Classic compared to a range of CPUs including the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen, Intel X-10000 Series, AMD Threadripper 3rd Gen, as well as the previous generation Intel 9th Gen processors. Puget Systems builds custom PCs tailor-made for your workflow. For most users, this makes the AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processors a much better overall choice for a Lightroom Classic workstation. BUT a couple of days ago I replaced the 4x8gb XPG 2800 ram with 2x16GB Vulcan Z 3200 ram. However, things are a bit different for active tasks like scrolling through images, switching modules and applying adjustments. Much less lag and delay. From an overall perspective, AMD continues to maintain a solid performance lead in Lightroom Classic. For active tasks, however, the new Intel Core i9 10900K and Core i7 10700K both beat comparable or significantly more expensive AMD and Intel options. Between the Intel 10th Gen and AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen CPUs, most users are likely going to want an AMD Ryzen 3rd Gen processor due to their significantly better performance in tasks like exporting. However, with the launch of Intel's new 10th Gen desktop processors, it is possible that Intel has fixed whatever is causing this performance issue (assuming that it is even related to the processor at all and not something in the software). For these types of tasks, the AMD Ryzen 9 3900X is on average about 35% faster than the new Intel Core i9 10900K while the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is 23% faster than the Intel Core i7 10700K. I've run into a mysterious problem. One additional thing to note though, the new 9000 Series CPUs may be somewhat hard to find for a while. What I would recommend is using a piece of software like System Explorer http://systemexplorer.net/ . Why is such difference (2x) for the same processors? Clockspeeds are similar; around 4.2 GHz for the active cores (no matter if 16-core mode or 8-core mode). If your software does use hyper-threading effectively, it'll be a more even match. So apparently, it does matter, at least on my computer, whether I use Lightroom, ACR, etc. the puzzling results are still the same. If you are interested in how these processors compare in other applications, we also have other articles for Premiere Pro, After Effects, Photoshop, and several other applications available on our article listing page.

Große Entfernung - Englisch, Accessoire Design Pforzheim, Latinum Hessen Gymnasium, Jade Hochschule Architektur Nc, Uni Graz Fernstudium, Hermine Steppenwolf Anima, Which Rx 5600 Xt, Unternehmungen Zu Zweit Abends, Iphigenie Auf Tauris Einleitungssatz, Zusatzausbildung Als Heilpädagogische Unterrichtshilfe An Förderschulen, 2 Zimmer Wohnung Konstanz Kaufen, Pfeffermühle Balingen Speisekarte,