Benchmark

[ghost]

from http://mollyrocket.com/meowhash:

It’s the fastest hash function we know of by a factor of at least 3.

ok that is great - but what are we comparing it against

would be nice to see what the competitors are and/or what the methodology was

thanks

[pjanx]

Please include SipHash 1-3. Related reading.

[ghost]

@pjanx Meow is a Non-cryptographic hash function, so SipHash is not comparable

http://wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_hash_functions#Non-cryptographic_hash_functions

[pjanx]

@cup It is still a hash function and up for comparison, if only for curiosity reasons.

[cmuratori]

SipHash is not a fast hash function, so it's not a particularly useful datapoint. Their "faster version of SipHash" is HighwayHash and it is only 4 bytes per cycle. Meow hash is 16 bytes per cycle, or roughly 4 times faster in cache. Out of cache, Meow still wins, but it gets slowed down to memory throughput speed, which varies per CPU so it's hard to quote a particular number. Modern CPUs can usually deliver memory faster than 4 bytes per cycle, though, so Meow typically still beats 4bpc hashes like Highway et al.

[ghost]

here are some that might be worth comparing

• http://github.com/google/highwayhash
• http://github.com/jandrewrogers/MetroHash
• http://github.com/lemire/rollinghashcpp
• http://github.com/leo-yuriev/t1ha

[cmuratori]

Really not sure what you're asking for here, because all of these hashes post statistics, as does Meow. But to summarize, Meow is much faster than everything you posted, and it generates larger hashes as well. In most cases you can tell that just from reading the web pages you posted :) Again, Meow is 16 bytes/cycle for up to 512-bit hash. The hashes you posted all generate smaller hashes at less bytes per cycle. How much slower they are depends on how big of a hash you ask them to make, because most of them get slower for larger hash outputs, while Meow does not (it is the same speed for any hash size up to 512 bits).