[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 580: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/phpbb/session.php on line 636: sizeof(): Parameter must be an array or an object that implements Countable
3.14.by forum • x86 vs x64
Page 1 of 1

x86 vs x64

Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2009 8:30 pm
by d0PING
extremely need some info about perfomance of x64 and x86:
cause from reversing point of view 64-shit;
but from optimization poin of view: man that's 16 64-bits gpr and 16 xmm registers
with good implementation that's cool.

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:10 am
by Sc00bz
Huh?
Are you still stuck on trying to reverse engineer the brute forcer. It's not that hard if you try to optimized md5 by writing it in x86-64 it looks almost the same as Bar's brute forcer. I don't know why he uses Intel's compiler because he's forced to either spend $1000 on a license or never ask for donations. Ohh right actually he has asked for donations (stuff not money) so I hope he has a license :).

If you're trying to implement your own brute forcer there's info on this forum on how to optimize it (even more so than Bar's by like 2% *cough*).

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:45 am
by BarsMonster
Sc00bz wrote:Huh?
Are you still stuck on trying to reverse engineer the brute forcer. It's not that hard if you try to optimized md5 by writing it in x86-64 it looks almost the same as Bar's brute forcer. I don't know why he uses Intel's compiler because he's forced to either spend $1000 on a license or never ask for donations. Ohh right actually he has asked for donations (stuff not money) so I hope he has a license :).

If you're trying to implement your own brute forcer there's info on this forum on how to optimize it (even more so than Bar's by like 2% *cough*).
Don't worry, I am not selling any binaries, just sources ;-)
And in this part of the world licenses... are really important. :crazy:

But anyway, I am so happy with ICC(at times), so this might be my first piece of software I might intentionally buy.

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 9:07 am
by BarsMonster
So, yeah, speed difference is only caused by additional registers (a little more general purpose, and 8 more SSE2 ones).
64-bit rotate is not used anyway. I was thinking about using CPUs rotate, but it's faster to do 4 instructions via SSE2.

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 11:48 am
by d0PING
>>>It's not that hard if you try to optimized md5 by writing it in x86-64 it looks almost the same as Bar's brute forcer.
i don't have x64-no testing :( moreover,my nothwood aka P4 is i guess the first, which got sse2 support,now even f**** atom n270 got ssse3 :mad:
to make some really optim. you'll need to go to the most deep aka assemler 8-)
>>>x86-64 it looks almost the same as Bar's brute forcer
i know how bars for x86-sse2 looks like;what does it mean ''almost''?more specific, please!
>>>own brute forcer there's info on this forum on how to optimize it
man, :crazy: this is very big forum, have no time to read whole it,optimize??? something :joy: new (except reversing of last round ) then please give some link :wink:
license& icc
license:in eastern Europe & for a guy which first program aka helloworld was patches and keygens, after that virii :crazy: ,license-flexIm is ....very important in his life :D :D :D
$1,000-holly shit, :shock: :shock: :shock:
Anyway, ICC is the best compiler(not linker) for x86 i have ever seen :roll: i like its support and technical papers for intel
icc is used even for amd hardware :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: -the best, but you need to play with optim. keys 8-)
please, my first post >>> info about perfomance of x64 and x86:
some testing,i'm now thinking about md5 implementation for x64 and interested for it's speed vs x86 implementation.

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 2:30 pm
by BarsMonster
on x64 it's ~20% faster as far as I remember.

That applies only to C2D and only this algorithm.

If algorithm would be simpler, it might give less improvement (if it can fit in less registers).

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 3:05 pm
by d0PING
only 20% ...well icc cann't play correct with xmm(i guess)...hello fasm :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 4:09 pm
by BarsMonster
d0PING wrote:only 20% ...well icc cann't play correct with xmm(i guess)...hello fasm :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
Do you still think one can handle 1500 SSE2 instruction with FASM in a cost-effective way? ;-)

Or you just need effective, no matter the cost :-)

Re: x86 vs x64

Posted: Fri Mar 13, 2009 8:46 pm
by d0PING
>>>cost:immortal problem of all mankind:faster or cheeper, apache/mysql/rubby or nginx/apache/c++, memcached??? :wall:
<100 or 1000 hits per second?
programming or "state of ...transe"???!!!! :crazy: :crazy: :crazy:
everyone choose the...