10-07-2013, 09:59 AM
(10-07-2013, 09:38 AM)epixoip Wrote: your data is very poorly presented. no one is going to spend the time to try to piece together what you have and try to decipher your naming conventions and cross-reference it with the legend you provided. i'd highly suggest reading http://www.catb.org/esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Ouch! ok point noted.
(10-07-2013, 09:38 AM)epixoip Wrote: cpu hashcat displays different speeds than oclhashcat, so you're not even talking apples and apples here. with 200 unique salts you're looking at 2.3 million words per second for plus, versus 0.46 words per second for cpu. 2.3 MH/s * 200 unique salts would be 460 million plains per second. so in this case it looks like your gpu is about 5x faster than your cpu.
Lol I didn't know that! Just saw this: "One last note about performance. There was a change to the status-display of the speed value which does not affect the real performance. With new oclHashcat-plus v0.15 the speed that is shown gets divided by the number of uncracked unique salts. Older oclHashcat-plus versions did not take this into account. Don't get shocked when you're cracking a large salted hashlist and the speed dropped by hundret of times (or to be exact by number of hashes/salts), the total time will stay equal."
This makes sense. Thank you epixoip!