|
Search Results
|
| Post
[asc]
|
Author |
Forum |
Replies |
Views |
Posted |
| |
|
Thread: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has stopped working
Post: RE: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has s...
| Guess you have a problem now, since you installed the SDK. Remove the SDK and the driver with AMD buildin tools, then the most important step, remove it again using driver fusion soft (free version is... |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
19 |
29,834 |
08-29-2013, 09:28 AM |
| |
|
Thread: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has stopped working
Post: RE: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has s...
| ERROR: clBuildProgram() -11 is it still that error or did it change? |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
19 |
29,834 |
08-29-2013, 11:20 AM |
| |
|
Thread: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has stopped working
Post: RE: Radeon HD 7470m -- oclHashcat-plus64.exe has s...
| hmm well its hard to say. never say someone with hd7470m before, maybe its just a driver issue and will self-fix with the next stable driver |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
19 |
29,834 |
08-29-2013, 03:53 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Radeon HD 6970 24000 H/s : how do I get more speed
Post: RE: Radeon HD 6970 24000 H/s : how do I get more ...
| AMD dropped support for 5xxx and 6xxx cards a while back. We've discussed this here several times. Please update your GPU to get good results as hashcat is always optimized for the best card you can b... |
|
atom |
hashcat
|
1 |
3,585 |
08-12-2016, 03:09 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
Post: RE: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
| No, it's more like 11208 sounds to be correct, see here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1B1S_t1Z0KsqByH3pNkYUM-RCFMu860nlfSsYEqOoqco/edit#gid=1439721324 |
|
atom |
hashcat
|
10 |
9,323 |
03-07-2017, 10:02 AM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
Post: RE: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
| I have seen the same error with AMDGPU-pro 16.40. This is a driver issue, not a hashcat issue. |
|
atom |
hashcat
|
10 |
9,323 |
03-08-2017, 09:54 AM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
Post: RE: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
| How can we know, the segfault occurs inside the AMD library |
|
atom |
hashcat
|
10 |
9,323 |
03-09-2017, 12:32 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
Post: RE: R9 290x benchmark crashing at scrypt
| Yes it is, we're lucky :) |
|
atom |
hashcat
|
10 |
9,323 |
03-11-2017, 09:47 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290 WPA Speed.
Post: RE: R9 290 WPA Speed.
|
atom |
Old oclHashcat Support
|
3 |
5,757 |
10-08-2015, 11:03 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design questions
Post: RE: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design qu...
| Note that 290x is no longer supported with latest AMD linux drivers. You need to manually install old drivers to use hashcat. |
|
atom |
Hardware
|
16 |
18,472 |
08-29-2016, 09:51 AM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design questions
Post: RE: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design qu...
| the latest amdgpu beta driver works and support the 290x, but some hash-modes can't be used and it's generally slower than 15.12. The 15.12 is the best driver you can get for the 290x, but you can't u... |
|
atom |
Hardware
|
16 |
18,472 |
08-29-2016, 11:43 AM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design questions
Post: RE: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design qu...
|
atom |
Hardware
|
16 |
18,472 |
08-31-2016, 01:49 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design questions
Post: RE: R9 290 vs 290x pricing and reference design qu...
| You need amdgpu-pro 16.40 for kernel 4.4 |
|
atom |
Hardware
|
16 |
18,472 |
11-29-2016, 12:47 PM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 280X speed
Post: RE: R9 280X speed
| A common error is that people try to crack multuiple handshakes at once. Look at the status output if its trying to cracking only 1 salt, not more |
|
atom |
Hardware
|
6 |
12,804 |
08-22-2014, 12:24 AM |
| |
|
Thread: R9 280X speed
Post: RE: R9 280X speed
|
ocl Wrote: (08-24-2014, 11:47 AM)
--
I'm getting ~125 kH/s running Ubuntu 14.04 64bit (one handshake at once).
--
that perfectly matches expectations |
|
atom |
Hardware
|
6 |
12,804 |
08-29-2014, 11:36 AM |
| |
|
Thread: Quickie on how OclHashcat+ works
Post: RE: Quickie on how OclHashcat+ works
| the reason behind that is that some kernels require all plaintexts to be of the same length to process them efficiently. brute-force crackers usually do not have this problem because the length of the... |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
2 |
7,996 |
02-01-2011, 11:34 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Quickie on how OclHashcat+ works
Post: RE: Quickie on how OclHashcat+ works
| i should add two things
a) if a wordlist ends, all the buffers that still have data to process are executed one after another. thats why oclhc+ usually processes cl:1-15 at the end.
b) the size of ... |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
2 |
7,996 |
02-01-2011, 11:41 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Quick help with the APP SDK 2.4?
Post: RE: Quick help with the APP SDK 2.4?
| to run oclHashcat, you dont need to build the sample files. most important is:
a) setup ld_library_path and verify by doing "ldd oclHashcat64.bin" or whatever oclHashcat version you are using. all li... |
|
atom |
General Help
|
2 |
8,059 |
11-22-2011, 11:24 PM |
| |
|
Thread: questions on Rules used to reject plains
Post: RE: questions on Rules used to reject plains
| thats not completely true, they are just not working for fast hashes like md5. for slow hashes like wpa they work, as slow hashes use the hashcat cpu rule engine.
skipping candidates based on rule ... |
|
atom |
Old oclHashcat Support
|
2 |
6,801 |
06-10-2014, 06:16 PM |
| |
|
Thread: Questions about the new restore feature
Post: RE: Questions about the new restore feature
|
mastercracker Wrote: (01-05-2013, 06:51 AM)
--
1) Under Windows environment, you can stop by doing "q" or "CTRL-C" but does it save the progress if you directly close the DOS window?
--
Yes you can... |
|
atom |
Very old oclHashcat-plus Support
|
1 |
4,990 |
01-05-2013, 01:20 PM |
