Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2012 20:02:06 +0400 From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: OMP version not use all CPU On Wed, Feb 15, 2012 at 07:46:22AM -0800, Alain Espinosa wrote: > On 2/15/12, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote: > > What c/s rates are you getting for these tests, though? I am interested > > in both --test and actual runs. > > Option --test was tested on the same Core i3 machine mentioned in > "http://hashsuite.openwall.net/performance". Yes, but my question was about speeds of john-omp.exe - I don't think you provided any numbers for that (except for CPU time use percentages). > I give a try to NT2 > format also ("real" and --test), and found it a very little speed-up > compared with NT. I assume that using 64 bits john will be different. > Some numbers for 1,10,100...(same as webpage) hashes: > > John-1.7.9-j5[nt2] 19.41 18.9538 18.51 16.544 16.5446 12.019226 11.16 5.122 > > I will add all those numbers to the performance webpage mentioned earlier. OK. There was in fact a known slight performance regression with NT in 1.7.9-jumbo-5; it's been addressed in magnum's tree, so the next jumbo should have faster NT (should be about the same as NT2 then). And perhaps you can contribute some optimizations, too. ;-) 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.