Help please GTX 1070

[jfs]

Is this a bit slow?

ed@Desktop:/tmp$ hashcat -m 3200 pass -a 0 ~/Desktop/X/wordlists/rockyou.txt --username
hashcat (v5.1.0-1798-gff37264c) starting...

* Device #1: WARNING! Kernel exec timeout is not disabled.
            This may cause "CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES" or related errors.
            To disable the timeout, see: https://hashcat.net/q/timeoutpatch
* Device #10: WARNING! Kernel exec timeout is not disabled.
            This may cause "CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES" or related errors.
            To disable the timeout, see: https://hashcat.net/q/timeoutpatch
CUDA API (CUDA 10.2)
====================
* Device #1: GeForce GTX 1070, 6824/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #2: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #3: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #4: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #5: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #6: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #7: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #8: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #9: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU

OpenCL API (OpenCL 1.2 CUDA 10.2.141) - Platform #1 [NVIDIA Corporation]
========================================================================
* Device #10: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #11: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #12: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #13: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #14: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #15: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #16: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #17: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #18: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped

Minimum password length supported by kernel: 0
Maximum password length supported by kernel: 72

Hashes: 1 digests; 1 unique digests, 1 unique salts
Bitmaps: 16 bits, 65536 entries, 0x0000ffff mask, 262144 bytes, 5/13 rotates
Rules: 1

Applicable optimizers:
* Zero-Byte
* Single-Hash
* Single-Salt

Watchdog: Temperature abort trigger set to 90c

Host memory required for this attack: 1020 MB

Dictionary cache hit:
* Filename..: /home/ed/Desktop/X/wordlists/rockyou.txt
* Passwords.: 14344387
* Bytes.....: 139921525
* Keyspace..: 14344387

Cracking performance lower than expected?

* Append -w 3 to the commandline.
  This can cause your screen to lag.

* Update your backend API runtime / driver the right way:
  https://hashcat.net/faq/wrongdriver

* Create more work items to make use of your parallelization power:
  https://hashcat.net/faq/morework

[s]tatus [p]ause [b]ypass [c]heckpoint [q]uit => s

Session..........: hashcat
Status...........: Running
Hash.Name........: bcrypt $2*$, Blowfish (Unix)
Hash.Target......: $2y$10$I2Ue1ls7zPaezYpyjfYtXOa0Okmm4Fu.hwuOZKiPtpQy...peNgcy
Time.Started.....: Thu May 14 17:50:06 2020 (19 secs)
Time.Estimated...: Thu May 14 18:41:10 2020 (50 mins, 45 secs)
Guess.Base.......: File (/home/ed/Desktop/X/wordlists/rockyou.txt)
Guess.Queue......: 1/1 (100.00%)
Speed.#1.........:      525 H/s (2.59ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#2.........:      519 H/s (2.63ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#3.........:      513 H/s (2.62ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#4.........:      525 H/s (2.59ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#5.........:      517 H/s (2.60ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#6.........:      517 H/s (2.63ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#7.........:      523 H/s (2.59ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#8.........:      518 H/s (2.64ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#9.........:      523 H/s (2.58ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:4 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#*.........:    4680 H/s
Recovered........: 0/1 (0.00%) Digests
Progress.........: 88200/14344387 (0.61%)
Rejected.........: 0/88200 (0.00%)
Restore.Point....: 85320/14344387 (0.59%)
Restore.Sub.#1...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:128-132
Restore.Sub.#2...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:792-796
Restore.Sub.#3...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:456-460
Restore.Sub.#4...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:112-116
Restore.Sub.#5...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:716-720
Restore.Sub.#6...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:756-760
Restore.Sub.#7...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:1020-1024
Restore.Sub.#8...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:796-800
Restore.Sub.#9...: Salt:0 Amplifier:0-1 Iteration:1020-1024
Candidates.#1....: 108642 -> winter00
Candidates.#2....: jacobus -> ericam
Candidates.#3....: 27031993 -> 109876543210
Candidates.#4....: winston2 -> snoopy17
Candidates.#5....: buking -> afi123
Candidates.#6....: aerials -> 270383
Candidates.#7....: pokie -> meljoy
Candidates.#8....: eric03 -> bumbumbum
Candidates.#9....: smudgie -> polgara
Hardware.Mon.#1..: Temp: 56c Fan: 52% Util: 98% Core:1911MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#2..: Temp: 58c Fan: 51% Util: 99% Core:1885MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#3..: Temp: 55c Fan: 52% Util: 97% Core:1898MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#4..: Temp: 56c Fan:  0% Util: 93% Core:1911MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#5..: Temp: 58c Fan: 51% Util: 94% Core:1898MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#6..: Temp: 58c Fan: 38% Util: 98% Core:1885MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#7..: Temp: 56c Fan:  0% Util: 96% Core:1911MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#8..: Temp: 57c Fan: 55% Util: 99% Core:1885MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1
Hardware.Mon.#9..: Temp: 56c Fan: 54% Util: 96% Core:1923MHz Mem:3802MHz Bus:1

[s]tatus [p]ause [b]ypass [c]heckpoint [q]uit =>

-

ed@Desktop:/tmp$ hashcat -b -m 3200
hashcat (v5.1.0-1798-gff37264c) starting in benchmark mode...

Benchmarking uses hand-optimized kernel code by default.
You can use it in your cracking session by setting the -O option.
Note: Using optimized kernel code limits the maximum supported password length.
To disable the optimized kernel code in benchmark mode, use the -w option.

/usr/local/share/hashcat/OpenCL/m03200-optimized.cl: Optimized kernel requested but not needed - falling back to pure kernel
* Device #1: WARNING! Kernel exec timeout is not disabled.
            This may cause "CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES" or related errors.
            To disable the timeout, see: https://hashcat.net/q/timeoutpatch
* Device #10: WARNING! Kernel exec timeout is not disabled.
            This may cause "CL_OUT_OF_RESOURCES" or related errors.
            To disable the timeout, see: https://hashcat.net/q/timeoutpatch
CUDA API (CUDA 10.2)
====================
* Device #1: GeForce GTX 1070, 6824/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #2: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #3: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #4: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #5: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #6: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #7: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #8: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU
* Device #9: GeForce GTX 1070, 7051/8119 MB, 15MCU

OpenCL API (OpenCL 1.2 CUDA 10.2.141) - Platform #1 [NVIDIA Corporation]
========================================================================
* Device #10: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #11: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #12: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #13: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #14: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #15: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #16: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #17: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped
* Device #18: GeForce GTX 1070, skipped

Benchmark relevant options:
===========================
* --optimized-kernel-enable

Hashmode: 3200 - bcrypt $2*$, Blowfish (Unix) (Iterations: 32)

Speed.#1.........:    16924 H/s (20.32ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#2.........:    17173 H/s (20.35ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#3.........:    16895 H/s (20.51ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#4.........:    17095 H/s (20.22ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#5.........:    17112 H/s (20.37ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#6.........:    17069 H/s (20.37ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#7.........:    17059 H/s (20.24ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#8.........:    10876 H/s (20.71ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#9.........:    17030 H/s (20.22ms) @ Accel:2 Loops:32 Thr:12 Vec:1
Speed.#*.........:  147.2 kH/s

Started: Thu May 14 17:51:34 2020
Stopped: Thu May 14 17:52:03 2020
ed@Desktop:/tmp$

[NoReply]

No, this is just fine. The iteration count of the hash you are cracking (1024 iterations) is much higher than the iteration count used in the benchmark (32 iterations).

If you do the math: 1024 (iterations of your hash) / 32 (iterations of benchmark hash) = 32 (slow-down of your hash compared to benchmark)

147.2 kH/s (your overall benchmark performance) /32 (slow-down) =  ~4600 H/s (pretty much the performance you are seeing)