High ISO example. ISO 12800. Nikon D850, Sigma Art 35mm f/1.4, shot at f/5.6 1/100s ISO 12800
NEF file, processed with Adobe Camera Raw,
no noise reduction ...
(A)DxO file, processed with the same Adobe Camera Raw settings used above, no noise reduction beyond DxO...
(B)Clearly, the DxO file looks superior, but this isn't really a fair comparison, because no noise reduction attempt were made to the NEF file. DxO also changes the tonal range of the photo, so even though I used the same ACR settings, the photos look a bit different, because the DxO file starts off different.
Next, I used the NEF file, and pushed the levels and noise reduction around to a rough match of the DxO file ...
(C)Hey, that's not bad. Right?
But, here's where the DxO processing shows its worth.
Here is the NEF file at a 100% crop (it was a 100% crop for my monitors 2560x1440, but it won't link at 100%)...
(before tone adjustment to match DxO tones)
(D) (crop of A; NEF w/ no noise reduction)
(and after the tone adjustment to match DxO tones, along with a decent stab at noise reduction in Adobe)
(E) (crop of C; NEF w/ tone adjustments and noise reduction)
And finally, here is the ~100% crop of the DxO file...
(F) (crop of B; DxO)
The DxO processing handles noise reduction without loss of detail far better than what I can accomplish with Adobe ACR.
(E) and
(F) tell the story. With no cropping, Adobe ACR can give me an image suitable for viewing on a monitor. However, DxO allows me the ability to display the image at 100% with
very little to complain about. The blacks drop off a bit too quickly in the DxO file, mostly around the ear cups, but that's probably something I could probably rectify with a bit of tonal work.