Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2015 19:18:56 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: New SIMD generations, code layout On 2015-04-03 04:36, Lei Zhang wrote: >> On Apr 3, 2015, at 12:32 AM, magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> wrote: >> So what speeds do you see on the MIC now, for these formats? Are we >> hitting the bottleneck with single-thread candidate generation? > > Single-threaded: > > [zhanglei@...0 zhanglei]$ jumbo/john --test --format=raw-sha256-ng > Benchmarking: Raw-SHA256-ng [SHA256 512/512 AVX512 16x]... DONE > Raw: 1407K c/s real, 1407K c/s virtual > > [zhanglei@...0 zhanglei]$ jumbo/john --test --format=raw-sha512-ng > Benchmarking: Raw-SHA512-ng [SHA512 512/512 AVX512 8x]... DONE > Raw: 249164 c/s real, 249164 c/s virtual I'm not sure about MIC clocks but your SHA256 speed seems low and your SHA512 speed doesn't look right at all - it should be almost half the speed of SHA256. For example, my 2.3 GHz i7 laptop get these speeds: Benchmarking: Raw-SHA256-ng [SHA256 128/128 SSE4.1 4x]... DONE Raw: 7860K c/s real, 7860K c/s virtual Benchmarking: Raw-SHA512-ng [SHA512 128/128 SSSE3 2x]... DONE Raw: 3476K c/s real, 3442K c/s virtual magnum
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.