Skip to content
uencoder
TASK

Compare throughput of different hash algorithms

Measure how fast SHA-256, SHA-3, BLAKE2/3, and RIPEMD-160 hash a given input to choose the right algorithm for your throughput budget.

  1. 1

    Hash algorithms trade off speed against security properties. BLAKE2/3 are faster than SHA-256 in software; SHA-3 is slower but hardware-resistant; RIPEMD-160 is legacy. Measuring actual throughput on your data size informs the choice.

  2. 2
    Hash Crack Speed Reference →

    Enter a sample input or specify a byte count. The tool benchmarks each algorithm and reports MB/s and hashes/sec, so you can compare on the same hardware.

  3. 3
    Hash Calculator →

    Compute the actual hash of your input with your chosen algorithm to confirm it works correctly on real data, not just benchmarks.

  4. 4
    BLAKE2 / BLAKE3 Hash →

    For maximum software throughput, use BLAKE2b (64-bit) or BLAKE3 (parallel). These often exceed 1 GB/s on modern CPUs.

Frequently asked questions

Why is SHA-3 slower than SHA-256?
SHA-3 uses the Keccak sponge construction which is inherently slower in software than SHA-256's ARX design. SHA-3's advantage is resistance to length-extension attacks and different cryptanalytic assumptions, not speed.
Should I always pick the fastest hash?
No. Speed matters for bulk data integrity and content-addressable storage. For password hashing or HMAC, you want a hash that is not too fast (to slow down attackers). For digital signatures, use the hash matched to your signature scheme (SHA-256 for ECDSA/Ed25519).

Workflows that solve this

Learn more

Want to understand why?

Related tools