Date: Sat, 14 Jul 2012 15:13:49 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: Tavis Ormandy <taviso@...xchg8b.com> Cc: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: Rotate and bitselect investigation On Sat, Jul 14, 2012 at 12:55:47PM +0200, Tavis Ormandy wrote: > I meant the code in general, the results on amd are dissapointing > compared to the results on intel. You probably mean when comparing against AMD CPUs without XOP? I am not seeing better results on Intel CPUs than what I get on AMD with XOP. For example, here's what I am getting on "Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E31230 @ 3.20GHz" (Sandy Bridge, but without AVX), apparently at 3.3 GHz, gcc 4.6.2: Benchmarking: Raw SHA-1 (pwlen <= 15) [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 4x]... DONE Raw: 17892K c/s real, 17892K c/s virtual whereas on FX-8120 the speed is almost 29M c/s (with XOP). (All of these are for 1 core, indeed.) ...or are you not talking about your SHA-1 code, but in general? 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.