Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2017 09:10:34 +0200 From: magnum <john.magnum@...hmail.com> To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: OMP vs. OpenCL performance On 2017-09-29 05:29, Scott I. Remick wrote: > My system has an Intel Xeon E3-1276v3 (quad-core 3.6GHz) and an nVidia > GeForce GTX 750. When I ran a pre-built binary (John the Ripper > 1.8.0-jumbo-1-5901-gbda8f8e+ OMP [linux-gnu 64-bit AVX2-ac]) and > launched it, I saw it spawn 8 processes (hyperthreading) and was getting > a measly 13-14 p/s on PBKDF2-HMAC-SHA512. I presume your hashes are in the order of 500,000 iterations. If not, that's too slow. > But then I compiled a newer > build w/ OpenCL (John the Ripper 1.8.0-jumbo-1-5908-g004c382 OMP > [linux-gnu 64-bit AVX2-ac]), confirmed OpenCL and then forced it with a > suitable --format option. That instance (even running simultaneously as > the OMP instance) is getting currently 760 p/s (and rising, it was 590 > when I started) running on just the single GPU. This seems ridiculously > faster...? Is the speed boost really that extreme? I don't even have a > particularly powerful GPU... It's plausible. My (REALLY weak) GPU, a GT650M, outperforms my i7-3615QM 2.30GHz by 20% (also 8 HT) or so. Heck, even my ridiculous "Intel HD Graphics 4000" can do half the speed of my CPU! > This is making me re-think my passively-cooled GPU card! :D For general > usage it's fine (depending on the very-good case cooling), but if I'm > going to start using this as a compute card I might want some sort of > on-card cooling that can respond to GPU temps. 79'C currently, but it's > been rising from the 54'C it was when I started 30 mins ago. Ensure you buy an nvidia with Maxwell (9xx) or Pascal (10xx) chipset. As you've seen, even a low budget one will be way faster than your CPU. 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.