I've found the reason for low OpenSSL scores on GNU/kFreeBSD, in the way it is built by the PTS. The openssl binaries shipped by Debian don't have this problem:

Code:
CC= gcc
CFLAG= -Wa,--noexecstack -O3
on GNU/kFreeBSD, vs. assembler optimisations are only being enabled for GNU/Linux:

Code:
CC= gcc
CFLAG= -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -Wa,--noexecstack -m64 -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -Wall -DMD32_REG_T=int -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DAES_ASM -DWHIRLPOOL_ASM
This is clear from the full output of './openssl_/bin/openssl speed' also:

Code:
OpenSSL 1.0.0e 6 Sep 2011
built on: Sat Jul 14 13:28:40 BST 2012
options:bn(64,64) rc4(8x,int) des(idx,cisc,16,int) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx) 
compiler: gcc -DOPENSSL_THREADS -D_REENTRANT -DDSO_DLFCN -DHAVE_DLFCN_H -Wa,--noexecstack -m64 -DL_ENDIAN -DTERMIO -O3 -Wall -DMD32_REG_T=int -DOPENSSL_IA32_SSE2 -DOPENSSL_BN_ASM_MONT -DSHA1_ASM -DSHA256_ASM -DSHA512_ASM -DMD5_ASM -DAES_ASM -DWHIRLPOOL_ASM
                  sign    verify    sign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.020554s 0.000307s     48.7   3254.5
on GNU/Linux, vs. the following on a similar-ish machine running GNU/kFreeBSD:

Code:
built on: Sat Jul 14 13:42:24 BST 2012
options:bn(64,32) rc4(ptr,int) des(idx,cisc,2,long) aes(partial) idea(int) blowfish(idx) 
compiler: gcc -Wa,--noexecstack -O3
                  sign    verify    sign/s verify/s
rsa 4096 bits 0.078346s 0.001050s     12.8    952.6

Quote Originally Posted by nslay View Post
... FreeBSD is stuck at gcc 4.2 while the newer Linux distributions are using later versions of gcc.
FWIW Debian GNU/kFreeBSD builds the kernel with gcc-4.6 and -O2, glibc with gcc-4.4 and -O2, and much of the userland with the new default compiler gcc-4.7.

Quote Originally Posted by nslay View Post
Shouldn't, for example, John the Ripper run about the same on FreeBSD? Why should the same blowfish implementation be slower on FreeBSD? That shouldn't involve FreeBSD at all.
I agree, we may find more cases where the PTS differs from Debian's own package building, and this may account for some of the perceived slowness. With that fixed, we may then get a more interesting comparison of the actual kernels involved, their threads implementations (in applicable benchmarks), scheduling and hardware support.

Kinda cool that GNU/kFreeBSD even managed to lead some of the benchmarks in http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...ubuntu12&num=1