@forumhero,

what exactly is terrible about 130 MH/s @ descrypt for a R9 290x ?

You might have already noticed that there are no k (kilo), M (mega), G (giga) etc indications in all of the above chars because they (hopefully) are not needed for comparison. The most important comparison was between performance values of oclHashcat 1.21 vs oclHashcat 1.30, therefore the units were all simply removed (independent if they are k/M/G H/s)...

So if the output of oclHashcat 1.21 was 114 MH/s and oclHashcat 1.30 showed 130 MH/s, the values in the charts above were simply added as "114 vs 130".

what exactly is terrible about 130 MH/s @ descrypt for a R9 290x ?

You might have already noticed that there are no k (kilo), M (mega), G (giga) etc indications in all of the above chars because they (hopefully) are not needed for comparison. The most important comparison was between performance values of oclHashcat 1.21 vs oclHashcat 1.30, therefore the units were all simply removed (independent if they are k/M/G H/s)...

So if the output of oclHashcat 1.21 was 114 MH/s and oclHashcat 1.30 showed 130 MH/s, the values in the charts above were simply added as "114 vs 130".