* [bitcoindev] BIP324 transport performance: CPU baseline, GPU offload, batching and latency tradeoffs
@ 2026-03-23 2:52 Vano Chkheidze
0 siblings, 0 replies; only message in thread
From: Vano Chkheidze @ 2026-03-23 2:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Bitcoin Development Mailing List
[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4692 bytes --]
Hi all,
I’ve been experimenting with BIP324 v2 encrypted transport and wanted to
share some measurements around its performance characteristics, focusing on
throughput, latency, and batching effects.
The goal was not to propose changes, but to better understand where the
actual costs are and how they scale under different execution models.
------------------------------
Setup
-
Full BIP324 v2 stack implemented (ChaCha20-Poly1305 AEAD, HKDF-SHA256,
ElligatorSwift, session management)
-
CPU: x86-64, clang-19, -O3
-
GPU: RTX 5060 Ti (CUDA), batch-oriented execution model
-
Measurements use median of multiple runs (RTDSCP timing)
------------------------------
CPU baseline (single-thread)
Mixed traffic profile:
-
~715K packets/sec
-
~221 MB/s goodput
-
~5.5% protocol overhead
Selected primitives:
-
ChaCha20: ~780–840 MB/s
-
Poly1305: ~1.5–2.2 GB/s
-
AEAD encrypt: ~265–580 MB/s
-
AEAD decrypt: ~232–587 MB/s
One-time operations:
-
HKDF (extract+expand): ~286 ns
-
ElligatorSwift create: ~53 µs
-
ElligatorSwift XDH: ~30 µs
-
Full handshake (both sides): ~172 µs
------------------------------
GPU offload (batch processing)
With batching (128K packets):
-
~12.78M packets/sec
-
~3.9 GB/s goodput
-
~17–18x throughput increase vs CPU
After optimizations (state reuse, instruction-level tuning, memory layout):
-
~21.37M packets/sec
-
~6.6 GB/s goodput
-
~30x throughput vs CPU
Overhead remains roughly the same (~5.5–5.6%).
------------------------------
Latency vs batching
A key observation is the strong dependence on batch size:
-
1 packet: ~17.6 µs (launch + transfer dominated)
-
64 packets: ~0.5 µs/packet
-
1024+ packets: ~63 ns/packet
This suggests:
GPU behaves as a throughput engine, not a latency engine.
Small workloads are dominated by launch and transfer overhead, while large
batches amortize these costs effectively.
------------------------------
PCIe / data movement effects
End-to-end profiling shows:
-
Kernel execution: ~55–58% of total time
-
PCIe transfer: ~42–45%
Effective end-to-end throughput stabilizes around:
-
~3.2–3.6 GB/s
This indicates that once crypto is sufficiently optimized, *data movement
becomes the dominant bottleneck*, not the cryptographic primitives
themselves.
------------------------------
Additional observations
-
Decoy traffic overhead is relatively small on GPU:
~20% decoy rate results in only ~1.4% throughput drop
-
Multi-stream execution (overlapping copy + compute):
~1.37x improvement vs single stream
-
Optimal batch size appears to be in the 4K–16K packet range for this
setup
------------------------------
Takeaways
1.
BIP324 cryptographic overhead on CPU is measurable but not extreme
(~5–6%)
2.
Throughput can scale significantly with parallel execution (30x in this
setup)
3.
Latency and throughput behave very differently depending on batching
4.
Once crypto is fast enough, *transport becomes memory/IO bound*
5.
Batch size and execution model are critical factors in performance
------------------------------
Open questions
-
Are there realistic node-level scenarios where large batch sizes
naturally occur?
-
Would transport-level batching be compatible with current peer/message
handling models?
-
How relevant are throughput optimizations vs latency in real-world node
deployments?
------------------------------
I’m happy to share more details or run additional measurements if useful.
For reference, the implementation used for these measurements is available
here:
https://github.com/shrec/UltrafastSecp256k1/tree/dev
Best, Ivane Chkheidze
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bitcoin Development Mailing List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to bitcoindev+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/bitcoindev/35d5cbfb-48ea-4cec-bbb2-6597d40d8795n%40googlegroups.com.
[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 10025 bytes --]
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] only message in thread
only message in thread, other threads:[~2026-03-23 9:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: (only message) (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2026-03-23 2:52 [bitcoindev] BIP324 transport performance: CPU baseline, GPU offload, batching and latency tradeoffs Vano Chkheidze
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox