+- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum)
+-- Forum: Misc (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-15.html)
+--- Forum: Hardware (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-13.html)
+--- Thread: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 (/thread-3687.html)
Pages:
1
2
Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - atom - 09-24-2014
Finally, the GTX 980 arrived. Some really nice changes come with it.
More details here:
Let the numbers talk:
![[Image: 290vs980.png]](http://hashcat.net/misc/p131_img/290vs980.png)
I still have to do some more research on the new sm_52 chipset features. There is a good chance that there is some hidden potential we can use to gain out a bit more speed. That's all I can say for now.
Conclusion:
- The 290x is still in the lead from raw numbers
- The 980 is in the lead from from Speed:Watt ratio (TDP for 290x is 290W, TDP for 980 is 160-180W)
--
atom
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - underwater - 09-24-2014
Hoooo, hope v1.31 can solve that error--"cuModuleLoad<> 301".
BTW, GTX980's Power loss seems really good....
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - Kgx Pnqvhm - 09-24-2014
Which specific card did you use?
Some makers have factory overclocked versions, which might be good to know for comparison purposes.
And which ForceWare driver?
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - atom - 09-24-2014
(09-24-2014, 07:57 PM)Kgx Pnqvhm Wrote: Which specific card did you use?
Some makers have factory overclocked versions, which might be good to know for comparison purposes.
And which ForceWare driver?
Well it's a GAINWARD card, but it doesn't matter, it's a reference card with default clock speeds. The driver I used is ForceWare 343.22 which is the latest stable driver for Linux.
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - atom - 09-24-2014
(09-24-2014, 06:22 PM)underwater Wrote: Hoooo, hope v1.31 can solve that error--"cuModuleLoad<> 301".
BTW, GTX980's Power loss seems really good....
oclHashcat v1.30 does not support the gtx980 (and 970?). I had to upgrade to the latest cuda SDK to get the compiler to work.
No worries with oclHashcat v1.31 they will be supported.
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - atom - 09-24-2014
OK, some nice update. The benchmark above uses brute-force to meassure the performance. When I played a bit more with the card I did a benchmark using combinator-attack, the -a1 kernels. This kernel is also used with hybrid attack -a6 and -a7.
The picture is a bit different:
290x:
Speed.GPU.#1...: 5866.1 MH/s
980:
Speed.GPU.#1...: 5975.6 MH/s
This is using MD5. I hope there are more surprises like this waiting to be found
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - undeath - 09-24-2014
i enjoy seeing a nvidia card performing better than amd! Better performance on combinator is something
Does this also work for rule-based attacks? And holds this true for other algos, too, or just md5?
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - underwater - 09-25-2014
(09-24-2014, 09:50 PM)atom Wrote:(09-24-2014, 06:22 PM)underwater Wrote: Hoooo, hope v1.31 can solve that error--"cuModuleLoad<> 301".
BTW, GTX980's Power loss seems really good....
oclHashcat v1.30 does not support the gtx980 (and 970?). I had to upgrade to the latest cuda SDK to get the compiler to work.
No worries with oclHashcat v1.31 they will be supported.
Yes, I have tried v1.30 on gtx980 SLI, but it didn't work only show me a error
Atom told me that v1.31 can solve this. That's happy to hear that
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - ocl - 09-25-2014
interested in 970 benchmarks. there's supposed to be a 20nm version coming later? wonder if it consumes even less watts. I might get a 20nm 970.
RE: Benchmarks from NVidia's GTX 980 - atom - 09-26-2014
New optimization found in -a1 mode:
980 old -a1:
Speed.GPU.#1...: 5975.6 MH/s
980 new -a1:
Speed.GPU.#1...: 6507.2 MH/s