+- 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: Hashing speeds significantly slower than benchmark? (/thread-11025.html)
Hashing speeds significantly slower than benchmark? - goober - 09-26-2022
Im pretty sure this is just a case of me not using the correct arguments, but I am getting much slower hashing speeds for 7zip (11600) than I do for the benchmark version.
******************************************************************************************
hashcat.exe -b -m 11600
gets me
Benchmark relevant options:
===========================
* --optimized-kernel-enable
...
Speed.#1.........: 544.2 kH/s (68.61ms) @ Accel:16 Loops:4096 Thr:256 Vec:1
******************************************************************************************
while
******************************************************************************************
hashcat.exe -O -m 11600 >7zip example hash from the wiki here< -a 3 ?l?l?l?l?l?l?l --optimized-kernel-enable
gets me
Optimizers applied:
* Optimized-Kernel
* Zero-Byte
* Single-Hash
* Single-Salt
* Brute-Force
...
Speed.#1.........: 16852 H/s (9.03ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4096 Thr:256 Vec:1
******************************************************************************************
Any thoughts on what might be causing this? Without dumping my entire terminal in here both cases appear to use the same device. I did also notice the difference in "@Accel:" of 16 and 2 but not sure of the significance.
RE: Hashing speeds significantly slower than benchmark? - Snoopy - 09-26-2022
benchmark uses 16384 iterations, example hash 2^19 = 524.288 # 524288/16384 = 32 NOW take your 544 kH/s divide through 32 and you will end up with 17kH/s which is nearly exactly your speed
so the "problem" is the higher iteration count for the example hash