[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130813070049.GA24637@openwall.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2013 11:00:49 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: key-length for mask mode.
On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 11:33:34AM +0530, Sayantan Datta wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 13, 2013 at 10:51 AM, Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com> wrote:
>
> > [...] And yes, myrice's code achieved a similar speed,
> > including with more hashes - IIRC, we were testing with 1M and 10M, as
> > well as with a few thousand, and the speed somehow varied between
> > invocations, sometimes being above 3000M c/s and sometimes below. (This
> > is twice slower than hashcat's, though.)
>
> I have tested myrice PG-test branch without any tweaks:
>
> OpenCL platform 0: AMD Accelerated Parallel Processing, 2 device(s).
> Using device 0: Tahiti
> Local work size (LWS) 128, Global work size (GWS) 65536
> Loaded 12906 password hashes with no different salts (Raw MD5 [OpenCL])
> end self test
[...]
> guesses: 0 time: 0:00:00:21 0.00% (3) c/s: 14865G trying: sl3adu - bdbmme
>
> Myrice's kernel is spilling into scrach registers which might be the reason
> for lower performance. Most likely you had tested it with
> a different driver.
Another reason is that it is possible that myrice and I were using other
hash counts in those tests - 1M, 10M, and perhaps a few thousands - but
not 13k. It is possible that the thresholds are chosen poorly, which is
seen with this hash count.
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.
