Date: Mon, 19 May 2014 22:47:09 +0000 From: yungai <BM-2DBq3nJF7GXKr6Nk6EHzvxxGBec6gQn2NB@...message.ch> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: resuming with more processes then before (was: memory issues: john is eating it all (descrypt-opencl)) Solar Designer: > On Mon, May 19, 2014 at 10:00:18PM +0000, yungai wrote: >> I'm running a similar setup (--fork=2 on a 7990). >> After reading your post I'm wondering if I should run --fork=8 instead? :) > > Yes, for descrypt-opencl and lotus5-opencl (just committed), --fork=8 is > optimal for a 7990. I ran that in the contest too. > > I must admit that I crashed a 4x7990 machine by lotus5-opencl with > --fork=32, though. There's some kind of limit in X configuration or/and > AMD driver. But with just one 7990, --fork=8 works fine for me and > provides a boost for these two formats I mentioned. > > For md5crypt-opencl, --fork=4 on 7990 is about 10% faster than --fork=2, > but YMMV. I think I did read that question before but can't recall the answer and don't know which search keyword to use. Can I restore with --fork=8 even if I was running with --fork=2 till now without loosing past work?
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.