v1.01 lower WPA speed
Win7 64bit,GeForce GTX660M:
ocl v0.14: -n 160 -u 1024 ---> WPA speed 12000 H/s
ocl v1.01: -n 160 -u 1024 ----> WPA speed max 6050 H/s

looks like you're probably trying to crack two handshakes at once instead of one. remember that v1.00 added multi-cap support so you need to clean your cap file to ensure you're only cracking the one that you need.
When I crack my .hccap file, it show:
Recovered.....: 0/1 Digests, 0/1 Salts
if I had more than 1 handshake, it doesnt show 0/1 Salts but more (e.g. 0/10). Or not?
post your command line & full output.

also, why on earth would you use -n 160 -u 1024 for wpa? should be using something more like -n 32 -u 4096
I use -n 160 -u 1024 because with theese parameters I get best results...

Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
humor me and try again with -n 32 -u 4096
as you wish....happy now?
do you (or anybody else) know where is the problem?

P.S. Can anybody explain me theese parameters (-n/ -u) in detail?

Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
this does not make any sense, you should definitely show much better performance with -u 4096 than -u 1024. the explanation of these parameters has been covered dozens of times before, but to re-iterate, -u is the number of kernel loop iterations. wpa uses 4096 rounds of pbkdf2-hmac-sha1 so 4096 will naturally show the best performance since the loop iterations match the number of rounds. except not with your card, apparently, and i'm not sure why. it might be because it's such a low-end card.

can you paste the output of this command?
cudaHashcat64 -m 2500 -b
here it is...I know my GPU is not Titan but it works fine in oclHashcat v0.14 (2x better at least Big Grin)

Attached Files Thumbnail(s)
It might not be hashcat but your Nvidia card drivers that are making the difference. I've noticed a double in wpa cracking speed when using Nvidia driver versions between 320.00 and 327.23 any drivers before or after drop my speeds down from 100k to 50k. Why the newest drivers are slower I haven't got a clue. Also see http://hashcat.net/forum/thread-2269.html