[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2014 17:58:37 +0300
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: bcrypt BF_X2=3 is not always best
On Thu, Dec 25, 2014 at 05:14:59AM +0300, Solar Designer wrote:
> Here's an example, off Twitter:
>
> <@will_sargent> @solardiz "--test --format=bcrypt" BF_X2=1 is 8625,8784,8640,8928,8856,8784. BF_X2=3 is 8208,8233,8208,8424,8424,8424,8340,8233,8233,8258.
>
> This is on i7-5820K, 3.3+ GHz, running 12 threads on 6 cores, JtR built
> with gcc 4.8.2-19ubuntu1 per @will_sargent's entry on:
>
> http://openwall.info/wiki/john/benchmarks
More stable speeds on the same machine:
<@will_sargent> @solardiz Running in single user mode, CrashplanEngine killed. 8447, 8532, 8447, 8447, 8424.
<@will_sargent> @solardiz single user mode, B2_X2=1 yields 9000,8982,8910,9000,8910,8928,9000.
So we have a ~5% performance regression by going BF_X2=3 on this machine.
Alexander
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
