[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 25 Aug 2011 03:07:05 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Lukas's Status Report - #15 of 15
Lukas -
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 10:02:42PM +0200, Lukas Odzioba wrote:
> I've uploaded mscash2cuda-0 to wiki.
> On 9800GT - 1430 c/s [128th,14bl]
> On GTX460 - 8160 c/s [256th,14bl]
Thanks. Here's what I got on 8800 GTS 512:
Benchmarking: MSCASH2CUDA [GPU]... DONE
Raw: 1580 c/s real, 1580 c/s virtual
After applying your john-1.7.8-mscash2cuda-0.diff, I changed:
mscash2_init(1);
to:
mscash2_init(0);
or it was failing trying to use a non-existent second GPU as far as I
could tell. Do you have two NVidia GPUs in your machine now? :-)
Running two instances at once, I got:
Raw: 784 c/s real, 819 c/s virtual
Raw: 934 c/s real, 961 c/s virtual
which is slightly faster (1700 c/s combined).
Overall, this feels somewhat slow - comparable to a quad-core CPU.
There's probably a lot of room for optimization.
Your 8160 c/s for a faster GPU is much better, though. :-)
> Patch is configured for older devices (sm=10,128threads) to be more
> portable. As Solar stated only pbkdf2 is on gpu side.
Yet you implemented the on-CPU mscash portion of mscash2 in the .cu
source file - wouldn't it be cleaner/easier to have it in .c? (Maybe
this is how it should be. I am merely asking.)
> It is basicly Sn3f's implementation with JimF's optimizations, and
> it's not (yet) fully optimal. I estimate that optimal should do around
> 13k c/s on gtx460.
How did you arrive at this estimate?
> Now I'am thinking about buying ati card and making opencl patches
> optimizations to utilize radeon's computing power. Besides I want to
> make md5cuda patch faster.
Sounds good.
Thanks,
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.
