[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <BLU0-SMTP14114F2F5D56A37965478E7FDE30@phx.gbl>
Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2012 01:20:36 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank_dittrich@...mail.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Some relbench results for linux-x86-sse2 (jumbo5 vs.
upcoming jumbo6)
On 06/24/2012 12:47 AM, Solar Designer wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 11:51:57PM +0200, Frank Dittrich wrote:
>> I'll attach 3 files with benchmark output, the j6 one (current git),and
>> two j5 (original and modified by benchmark-unify).
>
> j5-sse2.txt:
> Benchmarking: FreeBSD MD5 [32/32]... DONE
> Raw: 4283 c/s real, 4283 c/s virtual
>
> j6-sse2.txt:
> Benchmarking: FreeBSD MD5 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 12x]... DONE
> Raw: 6540 c/s real, 6540 c/s virtual
>
> Where's the regression? I see algorithm change and a speedup here.
> (Low speed either way, but that's expected for that machine.)
I didn't list FreeBSD MD5 as a regression, but
dynamic_27: FreeBSD MD5
$ grep -A 1 "FreeBSD MD5" j5-sse2.txt
Benchmarking: FreeBSD MD5 [32/32]... DONE
Raw: 4283 c/s real, 4283 c/s virtual
--
Benchmarking: dynamic_27: FreeBSD MD5 [SSE2 4x1]... DONE
Raw: 6172 c/s real, 6234 c/s virtual
$ grep -A 1 "FreeBSD MD5" j6-sse2.txt
Benchmarking: FreeBSD MD5 [128/128 SSE2 intrinsics 12x]... DONE
Raw: 6540 c/s real, 6540 c/s virtual
--
Benchmarking: dynamic_27: FreeBSD MD5 [SSE2 intrinsics 4x3]... DONE
Raw: 5607 c/s real, 5664 c/s virtual
So, in jumbo-5, the dynamic_27 format was faster than the native
--format=md5.
But that's not that relevant, because in current git, the native
--format=md5 outperforms --format=dynamic_27.
Frank
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.
