Nice.   I surfed the archives and found the benchmarks for versions 5.5. and
5.6.   I'm only interested in the performance of AES/CFB
encryption/decryption and RSA
encryption/decryption/signature/verification.   The RSA operations speed
seems to be similar, but the AES/CFB operations seem to be about 56.5 %
faster.   Quite a difference.

I'm using AES/CFB to encrypt data streams, and that's why I'm trying to see
if it would be justified to upgrade from 5.5.2 to 5.6.0.   Seems like it may
be the case.

Thanks very much for your help.
Walt.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2009 at 2:06 PM, Wei Dai <[email protected]> wrote:

> Try these links:
>
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20071011082234/http://cryptopp.com/benchmarks.html
>
> http://web.archive.org/web/20061201042628/http://www.cryptopp.com/benchmarks.html
>
> --------------------------------------------------
> From: "Walter Villalba" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 1:59 PM
> To: "Crypto++ Users" <[email protected]>
> Subject: comparing benchmarks of different library versions
>
>
>> I'm trying to locate the benchmarks for previous versions of the
>> Cryptopp library.   I need to compare the AES algorithm speed using
>> versions 5.1, 5.5.2 and 5.6.0.   I've found the latest benchmarks
>> ( i.e. from version 5.6.0 ) in   http://www.cryptopp.com/benchmarks.html
>> but I couldn't find the previous ones.
>>
>> I'm using 5.5.2 right now, and I'm trying to decide if I should update
>> to 5.6.0 or not.   I believe the only reason would be a significant
>> improvement in speed for the AES algorithm ( I know there's some, but
>> I need to know if it justifies an update ).
>>
>> This is a great library, congratulations on your work.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Walt.
>>
>> >>
>>
>>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the "Crypto++ Users" 
Google Group.
To unsubscribe, send an email to [email protected].
More information about Crypto++ and this group is available at 
http://www.cryptopp.com.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to