|
|
Message-ID: <20130128004100.GA7269@openwall.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 04:41:00 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Proposed optimizations to pwsafe
On Sun, Jan 27, 2013 at 07:22:19PM -0500, Brian Wallace wrote:
> Ok, I'll do those changes. I haven't done much cuda/ocl coding in the
> past, so it might take me a short while to get up to speed on what works
> best, although I have a good background in C and hash cracking
> optimization. What kind of benchmarks are we getting on pwsafe-opencl vs
> hashcat.
Apparently, hashcat's speed is ~500k on HD 7970. hashkill is at ~480k:
http://twitter.com/gat3way/status/294968226209726464/photo/1
We're getting 355k:
$ ../run/john -te -fo=pwsafe-opencl -pla=1
Device 1: Tahiti (AMD Radeon HD 7900 Series)
Build log: LOOP UNROLL: pragma unroll (line 114)
Unrolled as requested!
Local worksize (LWS) 64, Global worksize (GWS) 57344
Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [OpenCL]... DONE
Raw: 355438 c/s real, 17203K c/s virtual
$ ../run/john -te -fo=pwsafe-opencl
Device 0: GeForce GTX 570
Build log:
ptxas info : Compiling entry function 'pwsafe' for 'sm_20'
ptxas info : Function properties for pwsafe
272 bytes stack frame, 16 bytes spill stores, 12 bytes spill loads
ptxas info : Used 63 registers, 44 bytes cmem[0], 288 bytes cmem[2],
4 bytes cmem[16]
Local worksize (LWS) 64, Global worksize (GWS) 57344
Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [OpenCL]... DONE
Raw: 128862 c/s real, 128862 c/s virtual
$ ../run/john -te -fo=pwsafe-cuda
Benchmarking: Password Safe SHA-256 [CUDA]... DONE
Raw: 128862 c/s real, 128862 c/s virtual
(The match of OpenCL and CUDA speed is curious. I did not tune THREADS
and BLOCKS in cuda_pwsafe.h, and was compiling for the default of sm_10.
Perhaps better speed is possible with some tuning.)
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.