Re: deschal6 == slow??

Ricardo J. Ortiz (rjoker@mit.edu)
Sun, 18 May 1997 02:28:44 -0400


Ive checked on the problem before and although I have no exact number:

deschal4--> fast but unstable
deschal5--> same as 4
deschal6--> not as fast but very stable.

by stable I mean that if other processes ocurr the computer will not give
total comtrol to the other program, thus sparing some cycles to deschaln,
the rule is then, the higher the n in deschaln, the more spare cycles are
served to deschal, thus in some long run, the computers which are used
morefreq. are the ones which benefit more of deschal6, the computers used
at a minimum then could use deschal4.

-Ricardo Ortiz

At 06:05 PM 5/17/97 -0400, you wrote:
>Hi everyone,
>
>I think that this topic has been touched on before, but
>I've never really seen a response... I have a Pentium Pro
>and went ahead and ran all three of the Win32 clients
>to compare speeds. I ran all of the clients at Normal priority
>(instead of the default low) and killed everything taking other
>cpu time... (this is all under NT)
>
>for 2^28 pairs:
>
>deschal4: 1162058Keys/sec
>deschal5: 1142278Keys/sec
>deschal6: 1120816Keys/sec
>
>Does that seem odd to anyone else?
>I've confirmed these results on two other
>PPros.
>----------------------------------------------
>Ethan O'Connor |Does cracking DES seem like too
>zudark@mit.edu |easy a challenge? Join the
> |Great Internet Mersenne Prime Search
> |http://www.mersenne.org/
>