[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <553BFAA7.9000109@mailbox.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Apr 2015 22:35:51 +0200
From: Frank Dittrich <frank.dittrich@...lbox.org>
To: john-dev@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: [GSoC] John the Ripper support for PHC finalists
On 04/25/2015 08:41 PM, Agnieszka Bielec wrote:
> on well with AVX2 I receive results:
>
> a@...l:~/jtr2/run$ ./john --test --format=pomelo --cost=0:0,0:0
> Will run 8 OpenMP threads
> Benchmarking: POMELO, Generic pomelo [AVX2]... (8xOMP) DONE
> Speed for cost 1 (N) of 0, cost 2 (r) of 0
> Many salts: 1704K c/s real, 213274 c/s virtual
> Only one salt: 1055K c/s real, 132053 c/s virtual
>
> the difference is biggest for 0,0 costs also for 2,0 and 0,2 is a
> difference of 24% and 17%
> at this moment I don't know why this happens
After pulling the latest changes up to commit a988a38c, I did reset
BENCHMARK_LENGTH back to 0 to get these numbers.
On one of my systems (i5-4570 CPU (4 physical, 4 logical cores, AVX2
build), the difference for --costs=2:2,2:2 is hard to notice.
For --cost=0:0,0:0, it is 1.3%, for --costs=2:2,0:0, it is about 0.5%,
for --costs=0:0,2:2 it is about 0.25%.
On my laptop with Core(TM) i7-2820QM CPU (4 physical, 8 logical cores,
SSE2 build), I get a 13% difference for --costs=0:0,0:0.
The difference is about 9% for --costs=2:2,0:0, or --costs=0:0,2:2, and
for --costs=2:2,2:2 it is about 8%.
On this laptop, I tried to use short --test times, to avoid throttling
So I used several runs of --test=1, but I'm afraid that throttling
interfered nevertheless.
After resetting BENCHMARK_LENGTH to -1, I get results for "Raw" that are
similar to the "Many salts" case in my previous tests with
BENCHMARK_LENGTH 0.
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.
