Follow @Openwall on Twitter for new release announcements and other news
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 2016 09:50:19 +0800
From: ethan <>
To: john-users <>
Subject: Re: Re: 回复: Does JTR support R9 290x GPU.


Thanks for such detailed reply. It's very helpful!
I suppose to purchase NVDIA cards to give it a shot. 

发件人: magnum
发送时间: 2016-01-20 05:27
收件人: john-users
主题: Re: [john-users] 回复: [john-users] Does JTR support R9 290x GPU.
On 2016-01-19 08:54, ethan wrote:
> Hi magnum
> Verified. The patch a0b4554 works on the 2 platforms below. Thanks.
> 1.R9 280x
> OpenGL vendor string: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
> OpenGL renderer string: AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
> OpenGL version string: 4.5.13399 Compatibility Profile Context 15.201.1151
> OpenCL 1.2 AMD-APP (1800.11)
> 2. R9 290x
> OpenGL renderer string: AMD Radeon R9 200 Series
> OpenGL version string: 4.5.13416 Compatibility Profile Context 15.302
> OpenCL 1.2 AMD-APP (1912.5)
Cool, thanks.
> BTW:
> It seems AMD GPU has some compatible issues. e.g. The clinfo and john experienced core dump with the combo of SDK3.0 and 15.302 driver.(I think it's caused by SDK)
> So how about the NVDIA? Is that more "friendly"  :) and I appreciate if you have any suggestion on GPU model selection.
Nvidia's drivers are basically problem-free, and always was. Sure, they 
too occasionally have bugs and then they get fixed. But normally you 
only really need to upgrade your driver if you bought a brand new model 
that wasn't supported by older drivers.
AMD are the opposite: They always introduce new bugs with each version, 
and many bugs never get fixed despite reported. I think half of all time 
I've spent with OpenCL was working around ridiculous AMD bugs. Even 
worse (like in this case) a workaround that fixes one version breaks 
some other version (even though both code paths are perfectly fine and 
valid code) so we have to use different code paths for different driver 
versions. To add injury to insult, AMD's drivers often get slower (like 
A LOT slower) with newer versions, for no apparent reason other than 
they really suck at providing drivers.
On a side note, AMD's latest cards need more power than they can 
dissipate in heat and sometimes even more power than the PCIe bus (plus 
separate power) are speced to deliver so they *will* throttle under 
serious compute loads (ie. cracking) and perform only a fraction of the 
theoretical figures.
Despite all this, before nvidia's Maxwell chipset hit the market 
everyone had to use AMD for cracking, simply because they were so much 
faster than nvidia. This is no longer the case at all. nvidia now 
produces the fastest cards AND the best drivers so right now it's a 
no-brainer: Do NOT buy AMD if you have any choice at all. The consensus 
right now seems to be that nvidia GTX 970 is "most bang for the buck" 
while 980ti is more like "best buy if you can afford it". Titan X is the 
very fastest, but delivers even less per dollar.
Also, never buy "gaming" cards with "improved cooling". That is newspeak 
for "cheaper parts with cheaper cooling" no matter how they put it. Use 
reference design cards.
See oclHashcat forum for many discussions about all the above.

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.