Quote from: t0nyst4r on Today at 06:40:34 PM

Quote from: renedx on Today at 05:55:17 PM

Quote from: t0nyst4r on Today at 05:38:49 PM

"Fixed" clbitcrack as in using an older build like 0.30, or a fixed version of 0.31? I just tried 0.30 and while it finds all keys ok, it's about half as fast as 0.31. I have 3090's so I believe I'm stuck using clbitcrack until the misaligned address issue is fixed for these newer cards that require the newer CUDA.

https://github.com/brichard19/BitCrack/issues/256
Is the fixed I tried before and showed execution of in the above quote.
If I wasn't such a nerd, I would send you the .exe, but I discourage people of doing that. You should really build it yourself for max. security.

The .31 isn't faster. The calculation is wrong, so it looks faster.

So apply that fix to 0.30? And the speed improvements from 0.31 is due to the fact that it's not working properly?

But like they said, the speed on .31 is incorrect...
The crazy thing is, Brichard is a good programmer. He built a kangaroo program using OpenCL that is actually compatible with all my cards and actually works on the 30xx series card. and the speed is accurate. The bad thing, it's not open sourced so I can't make mods to it to suit my needs.
Maybe he doesn't keep working on bitcrack because it has lived its shelf life, meaning brute forcing the keys from 64 on up (the original reason he built the program, was for the puzzle/transaction) is next to impossible without all hands on deck. Who knows...