blocks|key|2154309|text|沙-512比SHA-256多出25%25。在64位处理器上，每一轮的运算量是相同的，但每轮处理数据的数量可以翻倍，因为指令处理的是64位字，而不是32位字。因此，2/+1.25+=+1.6，这是SHA-512在最优条件下的速度有多快。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2154310|当然，也存在内存开销、指令延迟和其他因素；在Intel+Ivy+Bridge处理器上，长消息SHA-512比AMD+Piledriver快1.54倍，在AMD+Piledriver上则快1.48倍。|2154311|对于小消息(小于448位)，SHA-512将慢约1.25倍，因为只执行一个散列迭代。还有不同的交叉点，其中一个散列将需要处理额外的迭代，而另一个则不需要，但是这些数字是平均值，实际的性能图将在迭代增量点进行分步。|entityMap^0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|G|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|F|$]]

SHA-512 has 25% more rounds than SHA-256. On a 64-bit processor each round takes the same amount of operations, yet can process double the data per round, because the instructions process 64-bit words instead of 32-bit words. Therefore, 2 / 1.25 = 1.6, which is how much faster SHA-512 can be under optimal conditions.

Of course there is memory overhead, instruction latency, and other factors involved; on an Intel Ivy Bridge processor long message SHA-512 is 1.54 x faster, and on an AMD Piledriver it is 1.48 x faster.

For small messages (less than 448 bits) SHA-512 will be approx 1.25 x slower, because only a single hash iteration is performed. There are also various crossover points where one hash will need to process an extra iteration and the other will not, but these numbers are averages, the actual performance graph will be stepped at the iteration increment point.

blocks|key|2154208|text|沙-512(和SHA-384)通常在64位平台上更快，而SHA-256在32位平台上通常更快.|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|entityMap^0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|C|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|B|$]]

SHA-512 (and SHA-384) is usually faster on 64-bit platforms, and SHA-256 is usually faster on 32-bit platforms.

blocks|key|2154617|text|在一些系统上，比如我的Athlon+3000+G运行64位openSUSE+Linux，sha256似乎要快3倍：|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|2154618|The+'numbers'+are+in+1000s+of+bytes+per+second+processed.
type+++++++++++++16+bytes+++++64+bytes++++256+bytes+++1024+bytes+++8192+bytes++16384+bytes
sha256++++++++++189198.58k+++512668.07k++1043590.40k++1429210.79k++1641379.16k++1680277.50k
sha512+++++++++++48800.73k+++191544.23k+++343078.23k+++515876.82k+++611980.63k+++620609.54k|code-block|syntax|javascript|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]]|G|$]]

It seems, on some systems such as my AMD Athlon 3000G running 64-bit openSUSE Linux, sha256 is 3x faster:

<pre><code>The 'numbers' are in 1000s of bytes per second processed.
type 16 bytes 64 bytes 256 bytes 1024 bytes 8192 bytes 16384 bytes
sha256 189198.58k 512668.07k 1043590.40k 1429210.79k 1641379.16k 1680277.50k
sha512 48800.73k 191544.23k 343078.23k 515876.82k 611980.63k 620609.54k
</code></pre>

blocks|key|1012098|text|这是我一年前在CentOS+7.7中所做的比较：(2.9GHz+Intel+i9,2400+MHz+DDR4+PCIe+3.1，SSD:+500+GB)|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|1012099|++++++++++++++++#+file+size:+1.1GB,+OS:+CentOS+7.7.+

++++++++++++++++#+Secure+Hash+Algorithm+(SHA)
++++++++++++++++#+===========================
++++++++++++++++#
++++++++++++++++#+1.+Supported+(use+the+_Digest+column)
++++++++++++++++#+_Digest+Program+++Status
++++++++++++++++#+-------+-------+++------
++++++++++++++++#+sha512++sha512sum+CySec+Vault(tm)+default+digest
++++++++++++++++#
++++++++++++++++#+2.+Technology+review+table
++++++++++++++++#+_Digest+Program+++++Speed+Status
++++++++++++++++#+-------+-------+++++-----+------
++++++++++++++++#+ck++++++cksum+++++++1.709
++++++++++++++++#+md5+++++md5sum++++++1.019
++++++++++++++++#+sha1++++sha1sum+++++0.705
++++++++++++++++#+sha224++sha224sum+++1.404
++++++++++++++++#+sha256++sha256sum+++1.599+Supported
++++++++++++++++#+sha384++sha384sum+++1.005
++++++++++++++++#+sha512++sha512sum+++1.000+Supported
++++++++++++++++#
++++++++++++++++#+2.9GHz+Intel+i9,+2400+MHz+DDR4+PCIe+3.1,+SSD:+500+GB
++++++++++++++++#+file+size:+1.1GB,+OS:+CentOS+7.7.+Timing:
++++++++++++++++#+$+time+sha512sum+--binary+<file>
++++++++++++++++#+real++++0m1.342s
++++++++++++++++#+user++++0m1.361s
++++++++++++++++#+sys+++++0m0.128s|code-block|syntax|javascript|entityMap^0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|H|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|D|7|I|8|@]|9|@]|A|$E|F]]]|G|$]]

This is a comparison I did in CentOS 7.7 over a year ago:
(2.9GHz Intel i9, 2400 MHz DDR4 PCIe 3.1, SSD: 500 GB)
<pre><code> # file size: 1.1GB, OS: CentOS 7.7. 

 # Secure Hash Algorithm (SHA)
 # ===========================
 #
 # 1. Supported (use the _Digest column)
 # _Digest Program Status
 # ------- ------- ------
 # sha512 sha512sum CySec Vault(tm) default digest
 #
 # 2. Technology review table
 # _Digest Program Speed Status
 # ------- ------- ----- ------
 # ck cksum 1.709
 # md5 md5sum 1.019
 # sha1 sha1sum 0.705
 # sha224 sha224sum 1.404
 # sha256 sha256sum 1.599 Supported
 # sha384 sha384sum 1.005
 # sha512 sha512sum 1.000 Supported
 #
 # 2.9GHz Intel i9, 2400 MHz DDR4 PCIe 3.1, SSD: 500 GB
 # file size: 1.1GB, OS: CentOS 7.7. Timing:
 # $ time sha512sum --binary &lt;file&gt;
 # real 0m1.342s
 # user 0m1.361s
 # sys 0m0.128s
</code></pre>

I'm getting this strange result that SHA-512 is around 50% faster than SHA-256. I'm using .net's <code>SHA512Managed</code> and <code>SHA256Managed</code> classes. The code is similar to the one posted <a href="https://stackoverflow.com/questions/30852745/hashing-speed-cryptic-results-hashing-twice-much-slower-than-hashing-once">here</a> but I'm referring to tests taking caching into account (from the second time reading the file onwards it seems that it's cached completely). I've tested it several times with the same results.
My question is: is this logical or must there be something wrong with my test?

SHA-512 faster than SHA-256?

翻译质量差，导致语言生硬或混乱。

没有提供实际的解决方法或示例。

解答不清晰，无法理解或解决问题。

页面排版不美观，阅读体验差。

文章

问答

视频

教程

学习中心

腾讯云实验室

直播

竞赛

腾讯云代码分析专区

腾讯iOA零信任安全管理系统专区

腾讯云架构师技术同盟交流圈

腾讯云数据库专区

腾讯云智能顾问专区

腾讯云原生专区

腾讯混元专区

腾讯云TCE专区

腾讯云Lighthouse专区

腾讯云HAI专区

腾讯云Edgeone专区

腾讯云存储专区

腾讯云智能专区

腾讯轻联专区 

腾讯云开发专区

TAPD专区

腾讯轻量云游戏服专区

腾讯云最具价值专家

腾讯云架构师技术同盟

腾讯云创作之星

腾讯云开发者先锋

腾讯云AI代码助手

云原生构建

TAPD 敏捷项目管理

Cloud Studio

SDK中心

API中心

命令行工具

功能1上新10个字符

功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符功能2描述100个字符。

功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符功能2上新100个字符。

功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符功能5描述100个字符

功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符功能5上新100个字符

功能4上新

文章&问答评论现已支持表情

全新交互，全新视觉，新增快捷键、悬浮工具栏、高亮块等功能并同时优化现有功能，全面提升创作效率和体验

社区富文本编辑器全新改版！诚邀体验～ 

精选全网热门MCP server，让你的AI更好用 🚀

💥开发者 MCP广场重磅上线！

涵盖代码开发、场景应用、自动测试全流程，助你从零构建专属AI助手

一站式MCP教程库，解锁AI应用新玩法

聚焦“写作效率、视觉美观与运行性能”三方面进行全面升级，为您提供更高效、稳定的创作环境

社区富文本&Markdown编辑器全新改版上线，欢迎大家体验!

诚挚邀请您参与本次调研，分享您的真实使用感受与建议。您的反馈至关重要，感谢您的支持与参与！

社区新版编辑器体验调研

我得到了一个奇怪的结果，SHA-512比SHA-256快50%左右。我正在使用.NET的SHA512Managed和SHA256Managed类。代码与发布的这里类似，但我指的是考虑缓存的测试(从第二次读取文件开始，它似乎被完全缓存)。我已经用同样的结果测试过几次了。我的问题是:这是合乎逻辑的，还是我的考试一定有问题？

问比SHA-256快？
EN

回答 4

Cryptography用户

Cryptography用户

Cryptography用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问比SHA-256快？EN

回答 4

Cryptography用户

Cryptography用户

Cryptography用户

社区

活动

圈层

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问比SHA-256快？
EN