And I don't care about speed at all; I care about results...in time.
On the one hand, of course you are right. But we are discussing a bruteforce program here. For bruteforce, the only indicator of the quality of work is important - it is the number of keys/addresses per second.
If we are talking about randomness, then it is obvious that the program can select starting points in such a way that one target key is far from them, and the other is close, but this is not at all an indicator of the quality of work. For example, it is possible that someone wrote a program that instantly solved a some key in a wide range, due to the fact that one of the starting points coincided with the key - will this be an indicator of the speed of work?
Personally, I'm interested in testing different algorithms, but in this case your program is not available, you only show some working logs.
I also cannot fully test the modification from the sp_, since only executables for Windows are available, and 99% of my GPUs on Ubuntu. However, I saw a slight increase in speed on Windows machines, so in my opinion this modification at least has the right to life.
Again, here you are talking about speed in MKey/s...why?
Take away random, because my program kicks his backside, period. Small range.
What I am talking about is getting through a range and finding the key(s)...the results!
So are you willing to buy a program I created that will SHOW you on the screen that you are getting 2000 MKey/s with an old Nvidia or AMD card? Because I can sure fudge the speed on the screen to appear to be getting 2000 MKey/s
Or would you rather use a program that gets through a range quicker and finds all keys in the range? That is my point. Someone can posts speed and increases in speed but unless you compare them, actually working through an entire range, not just finding one random key, then it's all talk and quite frankly, BS.
I did a test with the original bitcrack with a less powerful card than what sp was using with his mod and the numbers didn't compute. My lesser card only trailed his by a few seconds in finding the key, but his speed showed 450+ MKey/s while mine was at 93 or 113 MKey/s ... see the problem there? His program and card should have finished 4x faster than mine. But it didn't.
I asked someone do a true comparison test, through a range, with 1 key up front, 1 key in middle, and 1 at the end. That's how you compare the two programs, not by MKey/s on a screen.