[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1F9F3E42-15ED-4429-BD4F-DE2F1268C7C3@erols.com>
Date: Sun, 11 Mar 2007 22:05:15 -0400
From: Erik Winkler <ewinkler@...ls.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: New NT patch
On Mar 8, 2007, at 5:06 AM, Alain Espinosa wrote:
> Revision #5
>
> - Now passwords are trying in blocks of lenght 40-64. This speedup the
> performance (not in the benchmark, in the "real" c/s),particularly in
> the incremental mode with near a 30%.
>
> - Add SSE2 code with a speedup of 20% over C code. Note that "plain"
> SSE2 code are a little bit bad that C code because the emulation of
> the rotate instruction that dont exist in SSE2 (gcc are smart enough
> to produce rotate instruction in the C code). The speedup is because i
> intermix SSE2 code with x86 code trying 5 passwords in parallel.
I am seeing the following benchmark under MacOSX and with 2.33 Ghz
Core2 cpu.
./john -test -format:NT
Benchmarking: NT MD4 [SSE2 5x]... DONE
Raw: 13612K c/s real, 14764K c/s virtual
The original patch produced the following benchmark:
./john -test -format:NT
Benchmarking: NT MD4 [Rapid NT MD4]... DONE
Raw: 6148K c/s real, 6405K c/s virtual
Is the large benchmark speed increase real?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail john-users-unsubscribe@...ts.openwall.com and reply
to the automated confirmation request that will be sent to you.
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.
