[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170626065423.GA10418@openwall.com>
Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2017 08:54:23 +0200
From: Solar Designer <solar@...nwall.com>
To: john-users@...ts.openwall.com
Subject: Re: bcrypt cracking on ZTEX 1.15y FPGA boards (bcrypt-ztex)
On Sun, Jun 25, 2017 at 07:07:53PM +0200, Solar Designer wrote:
> The speed is roughly ~106k c/s at bcrypt cost 5 on ZTEX 1.15y without
> overclocking, ~114k with overclocking. It should scale almost linearly
> with multiple boards (e.g. Denis reported ~103k c/s/board with 3 boards
> on the same host). I can't easily measure the power consumption right
> now, but I estimate it's ~20W as both the board (with a large but slowly
> rotating cooling fan) and the 12V, 5A power adapter (brick) stay barely
> warm to the touch. These used to get much warmer in Bitcoin mining
> tests (known to be ~40W).
>
> For comparison, according to Jeremi M Gosney's testing hashcat achieves
> ~23k c/s at bcrypt cost 5 on GTX 1080 Ti:
>
> https://gist.github.com/epixoip/ace60d09981be09544fdd35005051505
>
> Hashtype: bcrypt $2*$, Blowfish (Unix)
>
> Speed.Dev.#1.....: 23223 H/s (37.63ms)
> Speed.Dev.#2.....: 22953 H/s (38.08ms)
> Speed.Dev.#3.....: 22958 H/s (38.05ms)
> Speed.Dev.#4.....: 22821 H/s (38.30ms)
> Speed.Dev.#5.....: 23025 H/s (37.89ms)
> Speed.Dev.#6.....: 23266 H/s (37.60ms)
> Speed.Dev.#7.....: 23342 H/s (37.41ms)
> Speed.Dev.#8.....: 23209 H/s (37.62ms)
> Speed.Dev.#*.....: 184.8 kH/s
Jeremi has just posted more benchmarks for bcrypt on different GPUs:
https://gist.github.com/epixoip/9d9b943fd580ff6bfa80e48a0e77520d
| Maxwell/Pascal bcrypt Benchmarks
|
| Product: Sagitta Invictus-based dev box
|
| Software: Hashcat v3.6.0-39-gc918173, Nvidia driver 381.22
|
| Accelerator: 1x GTX 970 reference, 1x GTX 980 reference, 1x GTX Titan X (Maxwell) reference, 1x GTX 1080 Ti FE
|
| root@dev:~/hashcat# ./hashcat -w 4 -b -m 3200
| hashcat (v3.6.0-39-gc918173) starting in benchmark mode...
|
| OpenCL Platform #1: NVIDIA Corporation
| ======================================
| * Device #1: GeForce GTX 970, 1008/4034 MB allocatable, 13MCU
| * Device #2: GeForce GTX 980, 1008/4033 MB allocatable, 16MCU
| * Device #3: GeForce GTX TITAN X, 3051/12207 MB allocatable, 24MCU
| * Device #4: GeForce GTX 1080 Ti, 2793/11172 MB allocatable, 28MCU
|
| Hashtype: bcrypt $2*$, Blowfish (Unix)
|
| Speed.Dev.#1.....: 7039 H/s (234.21ms)
| Speed.Dev.#2.....: 8465 H/s (236.41ms)
| Speed.Dev.#3.....: 12313 H/s (243.82ms)
| Speed.Dev.#4.....: 21827 H/s (160.32ms)
| Speed.Dev.#*.....: 49644 H/s
Unfortunately, the power usage figures shown further in that gist are
at idle rather than at bcrypt load.
> Thus, these FPGAs from several years back perform slightly faster than
> this year's top GPUs at bcrypt, per chip. The four-chip ZTEX 1.15y is
> slightly faster at bcrypt than four GTX 1080 Ti cards, while consuming
> 10+ times less power. (I suspect the GPUs don't reach their peak power
> usage on this test, by far, which is why the conservative 10+ figure.)
>
> This doesn't mean these FPGAs are so fast and those GPUs are so slow.
> Rather, it means that bcrypt is a better fit for FPGAs than for GPUs.
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.
