[split] oclHashcat v0.19 - Printable Version +- hashcat Forum (https://hashcat.net/forum) +-- Forum: Deprecated; Ancient Versions (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-46.html) +--- Forum: Very old oclHashcat Support (https://hashcat.net/forum/forum-21.html) +--- Thread: [split] oclHashcat v0.19 (/thread-38.html) |
[split] oclHashcat v0.19 - vector - 05-25-2010 vBulletin md5(md5($pass).$salt) speed test: WinXP 32bit,GeForce 9800 GTX/9800 GTX+, 511MB, 2000Mhz, 16MCU Single hash - bruteforce: IGHASHGPU v0.62: 185M/s oclHashcat v0.19: 180M/s EGB v1.6.1: 160M/s Multi-Hash - (500 hashes) EGB v1.6.1: 0,85M/s oclHashcat v0.19: 0,33M/s IGHASHGPU v0.62: NA RE: [split] oclHashcat v0.19 - atom - 05-25-2010 oclHashcat does not cache 1st md5($pass) which is why it can handle more than 500 salts. RE: [split] oclHashcat v0.19 - vector - 05-25-2010 (05-25-2010, 01:10 PM)atom Wrote: oclHashcat does not cache 1st md5($pass) which is why it can handle more than 500 salts. Yes it can but there is serious problem with the speed decrease: list with ~340 000 salted hashes after 3 minutes of bruteforce: HashCat Code: Recovered.: 73/341183 hashes, 54/275276 salts oclHashCat Code: Speed.GPU1: 0.00M/s 2 core CPU is faster than OC GTX9800+ ?!? RE: [split] oclHashcat v0.19 - atom - 05-25-2010 its working perfectly.. if you have 180M/s in single-hash and you load 340k salts then the expected speed-drop is 180.000.000 / 340.000 = 529 words/sec. thats why it shows you 0M/s but actually its working. and its working correctly, since 529 words/sec is faster than hashcat which shows you only 50 words words/sec. the number of recovered passes also fit in, since oclHashcat word-generator works a bit other than hashcat word-generator. but on the end they both will have the same result. RE: [split] oclHashcat v0.19 - atom - 06-18-2010 done in v0.20, thread closed |