Jump to content

  • Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account


Anyone here try the new Intel Random number generator?


Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.

  • You cannot reply to this topic
7 replies to this topic

#1 MARS_999   Members   -  Reputation: 1232

Like
1Likes
Like

Posted 08 September 2012 - 01:26 AM

Anyone here try the new Intel Random number generator that comes with Ivy Bridge CPUs?

http://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/intel-digital-random-number-generator-drng-software-implementation-guide/

Sponsor:

#2 MARS_999   Members   -  Reputation: 1232

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 09 September 2012 - 04:23 PM

No one has?

#3 swiftcoder   Senior Moderators   -  Reputation: 9535

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 09 September 2012 - 04:48 PM

It looks interesting, but I don't really have a game development-related use for strong cryptographic key generation.

Tristam MacDonald - Software Engineer @Amazon - [swiftcoding]


#4 frob   Moderators   -  Reputation: 18411

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 09 September 2012 - 05:00 PM

My thought was that it is currently too limited. Only one chip supports it. While it might be interesting from an academic point of view, it isn't very practical right now.
Check out my personal indie blog at bryanwagstaff.com.

#5 Bacterius   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 7990

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 09 September 2012 - 06:13 PM

Wish I could, but I'm stuck with my Sandy Bridge until next year at least (no need to upgrade yet). I have to agree with frob that it is too hardware-specific to be of any real use right now, but give it two years and it'll be everywhere if it really lives up to its expectations.

The slowsort algorithm is a perfect illustration of the multiply and surrender paradigm, which is perhaps the single most important paradigm in the development of reluctant algorithms. The basic multiply and surrender strategy consists in replacing the problem at hand by two or more subproblems, each slightly simpler than the original, and continue multiplying subproblems and subsubproblems recursively in this fashion as long as possible. At some point the subproblems will all become so simple that their solution can no longer be postponed, and we will have to surrender. Experience shows that, in most cases, by the time this point is reached the total work will be substantially higher than what could have been wasted by a more direct approach.

 

- Pessimal Algorithms and Simplexity Analysis


#6 MARS_999   Members   -  Reputation: 1232

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 10 September 2012 - 06:22 PM

Yeah I just got my shiny new Core i7 3770K so I was curious.

I agree if it's new tech be very few who can use it but in a few years should be more adpoted to mainstream usage.

Thanks!

#7 superman3275   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 1976

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 September 2012 - 10:38 AM

I see no point in using it. Only, like, one tenth of your users probably have ivy bridge CPU's, and why wouldn't the normal random number generator work just as well?

I'm a game programmer and computer science ninja ph34r.png!

Here's Breakout:
Breakout!

Want to ask about Python and / or Pygame? What about HTML5 / CSS3 / JavaScript? What about C++ and / or SFML 2 (and 1.6)? Recruiting for a game development team and need a passionate programmer? Just want to talk about programming? Email me here:

Superman3275@Gmail.com

or Personal-Message me on here smile.png!


#8 Bacterius   Crossbones+   -  Reputation: 7990

Like
0Likes
Like

Posted 23 September 2012 - 06:58 PM

I see no point in using it. Only, like, one tenth of your users probably have ivy bridge CPU's, and why wouldn't the normal random number generator work just as well?

I agree with your first observation, but the second one is a bit narrow. rand() just isn't good enough for most things, and even a Mersenne Twister can be inappropriate in particular contexts such as cryptography.

The slowsort algorithm is a perfect illustration of the multiply and surrender paradigm, which is perhaps the single most important paradigm in the development of reluctant algorithms. The basic multiply and surrender strategy consists in replacing the problem at hand by two or more subproblems, each slightly simpler than the original, and continue multiplying subproblems and subsubproblems recursively in this fashion as long as possible. At some point the subproblems will all become so simple that their solution can no longer be postponed, and we will have to surrender. Experience shows that, in most cases, by the time this point is reached the total work will be substantially higher than what could have been wasted by a more direct approach.

 

- Pessimal Algorithms and Simplexity Analysis





Old topic!
Guest, the last post of this topic is over 60 days old and at this point you may not reply in this topic. If you wish to continue this conversation start a new topic.



PARTNERS