Openwall GNU/*/Linux - a small security-enhanced Linux distro for servers
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2014 03:31:12 +0100
From: magnum <>
Subject: descrypt speed (was: "Failed copy data to gpu" when using fork with

On 2014-10-30 16:49, Royce Williams wrote:
>> Using -fork=4 on a quadcore+HT and GTX980 I got over 82 Mc/s.
> On my 8-core AMD and GTX970, using fork=2 gets me 52 Mc/s, which is
> much better than no fork (~35 Mc/s).  fork=3 settles in around 54
> Mc/s.  Forking more than 3 doesn't materially increase the c/s rate.

Solar, Sayantan, all,

Why is this? This is bordering candidate generation bottleneck but 
that's not quite the problem, is it? So what is the bottleneck? Could we 
do something to make it faster without forking or *is* it just candidate 

Also, as far as I understand just from googling, Atom has yet to 
implement bitslicing. Yet his descrypt exceeds 100M c/s on a single 
Tahiti (according to How is that 
possible? Should we not beat him silly with our bitslicing version?


Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Your e-mail address:

Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.