On 5 Dec 2006, at 3:22 PM, Brian Gladman wrote:
For AES the round function and key scheduling cost per round are
basically the same for both AES-128 and AES-256. In consequence I
would
expect the speed ratio to be close to the ratio of the number of
rounds,
which is 14 / 10 or 40%.
My o
Jon Callas wrote:
> I just ran a speed test on my laptop. Here are some relevant excerpts:
>
> CipherKey Size Block Size Enc KB/sec Dec KB/sec
> -- -- --
> IDEA 128 bits 8 bytes 24032.0924030.66
> 3DES 192 bits 8 bytes
David Johnston wrote:
> Jon Callas wrote:
>>
>>
>> Moreover, AES-256 is 20-ish percent slower than AES-128.
> Compared to AES-128, AES-256 is 140% of the rounds to encrypt 200% as
> much data. So when implemented in hardware, AES-256 is substantially
> faster.
AES-256 does not encrypt any more da
