Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 03:30:30 +0400
From: Solar Designer <>
Subject: Re: ICC performance regression

On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 01:12:19AM +0200, magnum wrote:
> Old pre-built files, icc 12.1.4:
> Benchmarking: FreeBSD MD5 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 12x]... DONE
> Raw:	39204 c/s real, 39204 c/s virtual
> gcc 4.7.2, -native target:
> Benchmarking: crypt-MD5 [128/128 AVX intrinsics 12x]... DONE
> Raw:	36936 c/s real, 36936 c/s virtual

This is pretty significant difference in favor of old icc, and not all
CPUs have AVX, so I think we should simply continue to use old icc to
prebuild the files.

Why the name discrepancy, though?  There was no intent to rename this
format to crypt-MD5, was there?  If I rename it, I'll use md5crypt,
including in the printed name.

The performance differences for fast hashes are less important due to
the way the number of additional successful cracks per unit of time
diminishes with more candidate passwords having already been tested.


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.