SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms

Re:SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms by dchest on Wednesday February 01, 2017 @07:49PM (#13547042)

Similarly:

    BLAKE2s (32-bit words) - 554 MiB/s
    BLAKE2b (64-bit words) - 890 MiB/s

(source: https://blake2.net/)

The difference is also clear in pure JavaScript implementations — JS doesn't have native 64-bit integer operations yet, so SHA-512 is slower there:

   SHA-256 - 103.17 MiB/s
   SHA-512 -  34.29 MiB/s

Note that since SHA-512 eats 128-byte blocks, while SHA-256 64-byte blocks, hashing very short strings may be faster with SHA-256 even on 64-bit platforms (the same applies to BLAKE2).

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms by shakna on Thursday February 02, 2017 @12:53AM (#13548432)

> in pure JavaScript implementations

Is not JS cryptography a bad idea?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms by angry_octet on Thursday February 02, 2017 @01:14AM (#13548518)

No JS per se. In browser client side crypto though...

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms by gcp on Thursday February 02, 2017 @04:01AM (#13549133)

Harder to defend against timing attacks in JS, which are exactly some of the strongest attacks against modern cryptosystems.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SHA-512 is 1.5x faster than SHA-256 on 64-bit platforms by angry_octet on Thursday February 02, 2017 @06:11AM (#13549678)

Do you mean because of the lack of low level control/bit manipulation, vs C/asm, or something else? I would have guessed it was about the same as any interpreted/jitted higher level language (python/php/c#/java).

[ Parent | on HN ]