[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080807034453.GA21068@openwall.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Aug 2008 07:44:53 +0400
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: Core 2 Duo benchmarks JtR 1.7.3.1
On Wed, Jul 23, 2008 at 09:05:55AM +0530, Dhirendra Singh Kholia wrote:
> Intel Core 2 Duo E6750 @3.6GHz
> Linux kernel 2.6.24
> GCC 4.2.3 [64-bit]
> make linux-x86-64
>
> Benchmarking: Traditional DES [128/128 BS SSE2-16]... DONE
> Many salts: 3486K c/s real, 3493K c/s virtual
...
That's very nice.
> * Memory BW and Latency didn't make any difference in the benchmarking.
Indeed.
> Wondering if latest gcc 4.3.1 or gcc 4.4.x branch would make a difference?
Yes, it might further improve performance at MD5 and Blowfish-based
hashes, but it should not make a difference at DES-based crypt(3) hashes
(because those almost exclusively rely on the SSE2 code) and it might
affect LM hashes in a "random" way.
> < Added results to wiki >
Thank you! You entered the wrong number in place of the single-salt
benchmark, though - I've corrected this.
Alexander
P.S. I was on vacation, and I am still not done with my backlog of
e-mails. So please don't be offended by lack of replies from me. Also,
I have two independent updates of the jumbo patch to 1.7.3.1 in my
mailbox, so please don't spend your time on making yet another one (or
upload it to the wiki such that your work actually benefits the
community right away). I will release such an update eventually.
--
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.
