<p>It is not true (at least not in a direct ratio) for all hardware. Some algorithms will benefit more from more memory, or particular assembler instructions (eg, AES-NI). Some will benefit more from more hardware threads. So while most algorithms will follow a rough upcurve as system specs improve, you'll se more or less linear ones, and more or less plateauing or decelerating ones, and ones with different slopes on the more or less linear ones.</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-09T10:16:40.870Z
2016-06-09T10:16:40.870Z
user36303
<p>My question is about the hashrate obtained with same hardware (non-ASIC) on many algorithms.</p>

<p>For example, I've read that Scrypt-N is about half the hashrate of Scrypt. Is that true for all hardwares? Do we have the same kind of relations between hashrates on other algorithms (something like on SHA256 my hasrate would be 10x my ethash hashrate)</p>

<p>Thank you for your answers</p>

CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-09T11:08:27.390Z
Not that hash rate and comparing hash rates between algorithms doesn't actually mean anything. It doesn't relate to security for example. If anything having the simplest possible hashing algorithm (simple widely known open source design for ASICs, no patents) is a plus for decentralization and therefore security. That might partly overlap with higher hashrates, but it's not the higher hashrates that make the higher security.
Jannes
CC BY-SA 3.0
2016-06-09T13:41:59.400Z
Also remember that many newer hash algorithms, such as Scrypt, include parameters that vary the amount of memory used and the length of time to calculate a single hash.  That means that even the same algorithm running on the same hardware will take different lengths of time depending on the parameters used.  So Scrypt-N might have half the hashrate of Scrypt, or it might have double.  It all depends on the parameters used.
Jestin
<hashpower><algorithms>
Hashrate comparison for multiple hash algorithms
mhaddad
# Hashrate comparison for multiple hash algorithms

(Asked by: username_0 on 2016-06-09)

My question is about the hashrate obtained with same hardware (non-ASIC) on many algorithms.

For example, I've read that Scrypt-N is about half the hashrate of Scrypt. Is that true for all hardwares? Do we have the same kind of relations between hashrates on other algorithms (something like on SHA256 my hasrate would be 10x my ethash hashrate)

Thank you for your answers

**Tags:** hashpower, algorithms

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Not that hash rate and comparing hash rates between algorithms doesn't actually mean anything. It doesn't relate to security for example. If anything having the simplest possible hashing algorithm (simple widely known open source design for ASICs, no patents) is a plus for decentralization and therefore security. That might partly overlap with higher hashrates, but it's not the higher hashrates that make the higher security.  
> **username_2**: Also remember that many newer hash algorithms, such as Scrypt, include parameters that vary the amount of memory used and the length of time to calculate a single hash.  That means that even the same algorithm running on the same hardware will take different lengths of time depending on the parameters used.  So Scrypt-N might have half the hashrate of Scrypt, or it might have double.  It all depends on the parameters used.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2016-06-09. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

It is not true (at least not in a direct ratio) for all hardware. Some algorithms will benefit more from more memory, or particular assembler instructions (eg, AES-NI). Some will benefit more from more hardware threads. So while most algorithms will follow a rough upcurve as system specs improve, you'll se more or less linear ones, and more or less plateauing or decelerating ones, and ones with different slopes on the more or less linear ones.


---

