![]() |
hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - Printable Version +- 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: hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes (/thread-7007.html) |
hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - phahRoe1 - 11-12-2017 Hashes: 7268843 digests; 7268843 unique digests, 7268843 unique salts Bitmaps: 23 bits, 8388608 entries, 0x007fffff mask, 33554432 bytes, 5/13 rotates Rules: 1 hashcat (v3.6.0) W=3 Time.Estimated...: Mon Nov 13 08:33:39 2017 (21 hours, 12 mins) Speed.Dev.#1.....: 1470.0 MH/s (4.85ms) hashcat (v4.0.1-4-gfddb66eb) W=3 Optimized Time.Estimated...: Tue Nov 14 00:06:25 2017 (1 day, 12 hours) Speed.Dev.#1.....: 848.6 MH/s (0.93ms) hashcat (v4.0.1-4-gfddb66eb) W=4 Optimized Time.Estimated...: Mon Nov 13 20:05:49 2017 (1 day, 8 hours) Speed.Dev.#1.....: 952.7 MH/s (7.55ms) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ hashcat (v3.6.0) starting in benchmark mode... Speed.Dev.#1.....: 7751.0 MH/s (60.57ms) hashcat (v4.0.1-4-gfddb66eb) starting in benchmark mode... Speed.Dev.#1.....: 7780.9 MH/s (60.63ms) W=3 Optimized Speed.Dev.#1.....: 8096.2 MH/s (463.26ms) W=4 Optimized hashcat 3 is faster than hashcat 4, if there are a lot of hashes. what could be the problem? RE: hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - royce - 11-19-2017 I'm not clear from your post which tests are the ones that are for a large number of hashes. And to clarify, by "Optimized" do you mean that you are using the -O flag? RE: hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - phahRoe1 - 11-21-2017 judging by the tests the newer version the worse the performance. ![]() It is necessary to use old oclhashcat with which there are no problems. yes used the -O flag RE: hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - royce - 11-22-2017 What is the GPU? RE: hashcat 3.60 / hashcat 4.x many hashes - phahRoe1 - 11-22-2017 1080ti fe, if hashcat 3 slows down using hd6950 + oclhashcat 1.x, 2.x |