5 ms·
Whether your recommendation is valid seems to be quite CPU-dependent. Cf: cpu: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor BenchmarkAES_CBC-12
by kbolino 1mo ago
Whether your recommendation is valid seems to be quite CPU-dependent. Cf:
cpu: AMD Ryzen 5 5600X 6-Core Processor
BenchmarkAES_CBC-12 100000000 10.96 ns/op
BenchmarkAES_CTR-12 83161234 14.36 ns/op
BenchmarkPCG-12 345336063 3.463 ns/op
BenchmarkChaCha8-12 174143492 6.894 ns/op
BenchmarkXoshiro256p-12 254343658 4.717 ns/op
BenchmarkXoshiro256pp-12 266837442 4.496 ns/op
vs.
cpu: Apple M4 Pro
BenchmarkAES_CBC-14 162698020 7.370 ns/op
BenchmarkAES_CTR-14 242501074 4.954 ns/op
BenchmarkPCG-14 197000988 6.083 ns/op
BenchmarkChaCha8-14 237430095 5.050 ns/op
BenchmarkXoshiro256p-14 252911710 4.738 ns/op
BenchmarkXoshiro256pp-14 252656401 4.745 ns/op
Code: https://gist.github.com/kbolino/afbb86f3c9b2bd2f87272801d156f1d4 https://gist.github.com/kbolino/afbb86f3c9b2bd2f87272801d156...
- SideQuark 27d agoYou misrepresent the non cs ones by a factor of 5-10, even on cpu. First, you’re calling the prng twice per aes single call. That seems pretty dishonest already. And using Golang? That ludicrously slow also. To tell us what a cpu can do, do them using SIMD, you get pipelining and then many values per clock. Now try that with AES. Oh, you cannot, it’s not supported. And people needing lots at full speed will do them on GPUs. There is no world where even HW accelerated crypto comes close to non cs prngs on mainstream HPC systems.
- deleted 25d ago[deleted]
- deleted 24d ago[deleted]
- deleted 24d ago[deleted]
- deleted 24d ago[deleted]