aes performance

[slush]

It is in kilo _bytes_, isnt it? I think 84MB/s isnt that bad result :).

[snip]
The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192
bytes
aes-128 cbc      51108.77k    68049.87k    73548.62k    73809.19k
75586.27k
aes-192 cbc      45487.20k    57737.88k    61597.64k    62914.12k
63948.21k
aes-256 cbc      40880.73k    50780.57k    54186.47k    55259.88k
54481.37k
[snip]

... everything is measured in bytes...

Well, results are from old laptop, but 51MB/s isnt also so bad...

Marek

On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Olaf Selke <olaf.selke at blutmagie.de> wrote:

> hello there,
>
> as I understood tor spends most of its cpu time within openssl library aes
> crypto.
> Which result of "openssl speed aes" applies to tor? Is it aes-128 cbc 16
> bytes?
> In this case my old Prestonia P4 Netburst Xeon box's throughput is supposed
> to
> be roughly about 40 MBit/s as middleman. Correct?
>
> type             16 bytes     64 bytes    256 bytes   1024 bytes   8192
> bytes
> aes-128 cbc      84098.99k   119729.69k   138053.97k   142741.16k
> 144386.04k
> aes-192 cbc      75035.35k   104143.72k   115681.81k   120099.84k
> 120949.42k
> aes-256 cbc      69559.47k    92221.78k   102006.05k   105361.75k
> 100274.74k
>
> Strange to say that my desktop Core2 Duo E8400 @home performs only 33%
> better in
> openssl aes crypto than one of the old P4 Netburst Xeon cores from my tor
> node.
> For the sake of better performance I'm thinking about replacing my tor
> node's
> hardware.
>
> Olaf
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.torproject.org/pipermail/tor-talk/attachments/20090222/995a8e3e/attachment.htm>