You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
Hey,
I'm going to buy a new Netbook. The problem is, the cheap Intel processors (here: 1007U) don't have the AES feature, but the pure CPU-Power is quite more powerful than the E1-2500 from AMD which got the AES feature.
My question is, what do you think which one will have the better performance in the daily grind if the system is encrypted with LUKS AES?
Perhaps someone of you guys got an E1-2500 or E1-2100 at home and could deliver the results of
cryptsetup benchmark
Here a short view of the passmark results
Single Thread Rating
E1-2500 529
1007U 774
CPU Mark
E1-2500 918
1007U 1457
How could it be, that I got the following performance at my current Notebook (Core2Duo T7500)?
aes-xts 256b 133.2 MiB/s 132.2 MiB/s
serpent-xts 256b 144.9 MiB/s 151.4 MiB/s
twofish-xts 256b 136.3 MiB/s 137.5 MiB/s
aes-xts 512b 100.3 MiB/s 99.6 MiB/s
serpent-xts 512b 145.6 MiB/s 151.9 MiB/s
twofish-xts 512b 137.3 MiB/s 138.1 MiB/s
Shouldn't AES got the best performance and serpent the worst?
Offline
Some notebooks don't have AES-NI even though their CPUs support it (disabled by bios). Check /proc/cpuinfo if it has aes in the flags. Then check that your kernel supports it as well, aesni should be listed in /proc/crypto.
Offline
T7500 doesn't support it, but nevertheless should AES get a better performance than the other two, shouldn't it?
Last edited by Kabbone (2014-08-09 16:07:49)
Offline
Dunno. Apparently not, according to your benchmark. Although there are various modules for AES... a generic one, then intel assembler optimized, then aesni... speed varies depending on which is in use.
Offline
Shouldn't AES got the best performance and serpent the worst?
For encryption, I get that Serpent is the slowest, followed by AES and Twofish being the fastest on both my AMD 3305M APU and Intel i3-2370M.
For decryption, I get that AES is the slowest, followed by Serpent and Twofish being the fastest on both my AMD 3305M APU and Intel i3-2370M.
If you have an enabled working AES-NI processor, then I would expect AES to be fastest in both departments.
Claire is fine.
Problems? I have dysgraphia, so clear and concise please.
My public GPG key for package signing
My x86_64 package repository
Offline
Thanks for your replies. I just read, that AES is the easiest alghorithm of these three.
But what do you think how much the performance difference will be with and wihtout the AES-NI for such slow processors?
Offline
My post is probably useless to you, but I wanted to compare your results with my i5-2430M which has AES-NI enabled:
aes-xts 256b 1501.5 MiB/s 1509.0 MiB/s
serpent-xts 256b 243.2 MiB/s 247.5 MiB/s
twofish-xts 256b 269.0 MiB/s 269.6 MiB/s
aes-xts 512b 1165.1 MiB/s 1175.9 MiB/s
serpent-xts 512b 258.1 MiB/s 247.2 MiB/s
twofish-xts 512b 269.1 MiB/s 270.4 MiB/s
It's a faster processor than yours, so the 2x performance on Serpent and Twofish is expected, while I'm getting 10x with AES + AES-NI.
So yeah, if you want to enable LUKS+AES, get a processor with hardware encryption.
no masters to rule us, no gods to fool us
Offline
Thanks for your reply.
But finally I decided to take the 1007u without AES-NI, because it got much more power besides AES than the E1-2500 which was the only real competitor in this priceclass. Obviously my SSD suffers under the CPU bottleneck now.
Here the benchmarks for the 1007u + OCZ Vector 128GB
aes-xts 256b 104.0 MiB/s 103.0 MiB/s
serpent-xts 256b 120.0 MiB/s 113.3 MiB/s
twofish-xts 256b 100.6 MiB/s 100.3 MiB/s
aes-xts 512b 78.6 MiB/s 77.5 MiB/s
serpent-xts 512b 120.3 MiB/s 113.6 MiB/s
twofish-xts 512b 100.6 MiB/s 100.1 MiB/s
Offline
Pages: 1