+- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum)
+-- Forum: Support (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: hashcat (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-45.html)
+--- Thread: 970m vs 290x: benchmarks (/thread-6359.html)
970m vs 290x: benchmarks - r9290xocl - 03-07-2017
I have a 970m in a laptop, and a r9 290x desktop, I ran version 3.30 on both, and got these results:
R9 290x:
Md5: 13043 Mh/sec
SHA1: 4704 Mh/sec
970M:
Md5: 6626 Mh/sec
SHA1: 2301 Mh/sec
Does it make sense that the r9 290x is twice as fast, or there is something wrong?
RE: 970m vs 290x: benchmarks - atom - 03-07-2017
Makes sense as you compare a desktop discrete gpu with a mobile one
RE: 970m vs 290x: benchmarks - Flomac - 03-07-2017
A desktop GTX970 has more cores (1664 vs. 1280) and a higher clock rate (1176 vs. 994) than the mobile version, resulting in >50% higher output. Add the lack of cooling in a notebook and your results look realistic. Plus the 290X is still a very fast GPU.
RE: 970m vs 290x: benchmarks - r9290xocl - 03-07-2017
wow, did not know it would account for 50% difference. The R9 290x is watercooled as well, so even more advantage, while the laptop is screaming
I am OCing the r9 290x to the most stable OC I can and then test again, I am hoping for at least +30%
RE: 970m vs 290x: benchmarks - r9290xocl - 03-07-2017
Did some googling, so yes the 970M has 1280 cores vs the R9 290x has 2816. That explains a lot. Clock speed is 924 vs 1000 on the R9