R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ?

R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - Printable Version

+- 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: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? (/thread-6198.html)

Pages: 1 2 3

R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - Millenium251 - 01-11-2017

I've tested a R9 Fury Nitro with a to 1100 mhz overclocked gpu.

It needs for 8 digits wpa2 crack 3 hours. A GTX 1080 needs under 10 minutes.

GTX 1080 = ~400 kH/s

Fury Nitro = ~233 KH/s

So the R9 Fury Nitro should need ~ 15 minutes.

The reason for this astonishing result of 3 hours is maybe the the amount of data.

Hashcat shows:

2.500.000.000 hashes to test

8 digits (0 - 9):

10^8 = 100.000.000 hashes

So hashcat tests 25 times more than it should be.

Any reason for this bug ?

Used hashcat version is 3.30.

Best regards

Millenium251

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - epixoip - 01-11-2017

You'll have to post the full output for us to understand your 2.5B hashes comment. But outside of that, realize that the R9 Fury will throttle like a motherfucker, especially when overclocking, so that will definitely cause it to run much slower in practice vs benchmarks.

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - Millenium251 - 01-11-2017

(01-11-2017, 08:04 PM)epixoip Wrote: You'll have to post the full output for us to understand your 2.5B hashes comment. But outside of that, realize that the R9 Fury will throttle like a motherfucker, especially when overclocking, so that will definitely cause it to run much slower in practice vs benchmarks.

Session..........: 2
Status...........: Running
Hash.Type........: WPA/WPA2
Hash.Target......:
Time.Started.....: Wed Jan 11 19:13:04 2017 (1 min, 41 secs)
Time.Estimated...: Wed Jan 11 21:21:12 2017 (2 hours, 6 mins)
Input.Mask.......: ?d?d?d?d?d?d?d?d [8]
Input.Queue......: 1/1 (100.00%)
Speed.Dev.#2.....: 325.3 kH/s (55.00ms)
Recovered........: 0/25 (0.00%) Digests, 0/25 (0.00%) Salts
Progress.........: 32112640/2500000000 (1.28%)
Rejected.........: 0/32112640 (0.00%)
Restore.Point....: 0/10000000 (0.00%)
Candidates.#2....: 72345678 -> 79826934

[Image: r6h.png]

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - epixoip - 01-11-2017

Oh, your problem here is that you have 25 handshakes in your hccap:

Recovered........: 0/25 (0.00%) Digests, 0/25 (0.00%) Salts

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - Millenium251 - 01-11-2017

Thanks Big Grin

. I've forgotten to strip with pyrit Big Grin

. My fault. Shame on me Wink

.

Now it works. 9 minutes to go.

The Fury Nitro has a button for dual bios. It doesn't throttel below 85 °C with the second bios (switch pressed).

The second bios allows also 300 W TDP.

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - epixoip - 01-11-2017

It throttles not only for heat but, also power consumption. It's a 450W card in a 300W package, so it's going to throttle hard regardless of temperature.

Theoretically this card is capable of ~ 290 KH/s on WPA2, but you're only seeing ~ 233 KH/s with an overclock -- about 20% slower due to PowerTune throttling. And if you were to set PowerTune to something like +50% you'll likely start a fire attempting to get more performance. This is why we strongly recommend avoiding AMD GPUs.

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - wgmmmx - 01-12-2017

(01-11-2017, 11:17 PM)epixoip Wrote: It throttles not only for heat but, also power consumption. It's a 450W card in a 300W package, so it's going to throttle hard regardless of temperature.

Theoretically this card is capable of ~ 290 KH/s on WPA2, but you're only seeing ~ 233 KH/s with an overclock -- about 20% slower due to PowerTune throttling. And if you were to set PowerTune to something like +50% you'll likely start a fire attempting to get more performance. This is why we strongly recommend avoiding AMD GPUs.

You mean AMD RX 480 still is bad ??

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - epixoip - 01-12-2017

RX 480 is the same architecture AMD has been pushing for the past 5 years, this time with a long-overdue process shrink. AMD claims it's a 150W GPU; at 28nm it would probably draw around 275W, and moving to 14nm will probably save ~25%, so we can assume this is a ~205W GPU in a 150W package, meaning this card likely WILL throttle. Which sucks, because 2304 cores @ 1120 Mhz puts its performance right in the middle between HD 7970 and R9 290 (which is really shitty for a 2017 flagship considering those are 3-5 year old GPUs), and with throttling it will perform closer to an overclocked HD 7970.

So yeah, still absolutely no reason to ever consider AMD over Nvidia.

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - Flomac - 01-12-2017

The RX 480 was never advertised as the flagship product. By price and number of shaders that would still be clearly the Fury X, which I wanted to see performing in Hashcat, but then the heat/power/throttling problem Epixoip mentioned would still throw the card down under heavy hashing pressure.
By what I read the coming up Vega chip has a redesigned GCN, which looks promising in the details. Maybe AMD has something in the box there. But hardly to believe it would come anywhere near the also upcoming 1080Ti. I'm guessing somewhere between the 1070 and 1080, closer to the latter one. Maybe it will be competitive in price/performance ratio with a modest power consumption.

RE: R9 Fury Nitro 1100 mhz gpu clock - so slow - why ? - epixoip - 01-12-2017

I don't think it's actually "redesigned", it seems to just be a die shrink.