"MD5, SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-512… what's the actual difference? Which is more secure? Which is faster? Which should I use?" — overwhelmed by algorithm choices.
This cheat sheet compares five major hash algorithms across output length, security level, speed, and typical use cases — see all differences in one table.
01 Core Parameters of Five Major Hash Algorithms
The table below compares the key parameters of five common hash algorithms: MD5, SHA-1, SHA-256, SHA-384, and SHA-512. When choosing an algorithm, security is the primary consideration — for security-related use cases, use SHA-256 or higher.
Hash Algorithm Core Parameters Comparison
| Algorithm | Output Length | Hex Characters | Security Level | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MD5 | 128 bits | 32 | ❌ Insecure | Broken |
| SHA-1 | 160 bits | 40 | ⚠️ Deprecated | Known collisions |
| SHA-256 | 256 bits | 64 | ✅ Secure | Recommended |
| SHA-384 | 384 bits | 96 | ✅ High security | Recommended |
| SHA-512 | 512 bits | 128 | ✅ Highest security | Recommended |
02 Detailed Use Cases for Each Algorithm
MD5 (128 bits): Though broken for security, its short output and fast speed keep it useful for non-security purposes — file deduplication, cache key generation, database sharding keys. Never use it for password hashing or digital signatures.
SHA-1 (160 bits): Google publicly demonstrated a SHA-1 collision attack in 2017. Git still uses SHA-1 internally (migrating to SHA-256), but new projects should not choose SHA-1.
SHA-256 (256 bits): The current gold standard. Used by Bitcoin blockchain, TLS/SSL certificates, code signing, API tokens. The default choice for general-purpose hashing.
SHA-384 (384 bits): A truncated version of SHA-512, used as an alternative in TLS 1.2+. Higher security than SHA-256, but relatively niche.
SHA-512 (512 bits): Highest security level. On 64-bit systems, it can actually compute faster than SHA-256. Ideal for high-security requirements like government and financial systems.
03 Speed & Performance Considerations
In Suried Hash Generator, all algorithms are computed locally using the Web Crypto API with excellent performance. For small text (<1 KB), all algorithms compute in under a millisecond with negligible differences.
For large files (>100 MB), SHA-512 can actually outperform SHA-256 on 64-bit systems because SHA-512 processes 64-byte data blocks (vs. 32 bytes for SHA-256). If you process many large files on a 64-bit system, SHA-512 offers both better performance and higher security.
While MD5 is theoretically the fastest, due to its security issues, we recommend SHA-256 as the default — far more secure than MD5, with speed differences imperceptible in real-world usage.
For password hashing (e.g., user login), you actually don't want a fast algorithm! Specialized password hashing functions like bcrypt and scrypt are deliberately slow to increase brute-force costs.
FAQ
Which is better: SHA-256 or SHA-512?
SHA-512 offers higher security and is faster on 64-bit systems, but SHA-256 is sufficient for the vast majority of use cases. If you don't have special security requirements, SHA-256 is the best default.
What is SHA-384 used for? Why is it less common?
SHA-384 is a truncated version of SHA-512, primarily used as an alternative in TLS handshake protocols. In everyday use, SHA-256 is secure enough, and SHA-512's full output provides higher security, so SHA-384 has limited use cases.
Why does Git still use SHA-1?
Git has used SHA-1 since its creation in 2005, and migrating to SHA-256 involves massive infrastructure changes. Git 2.29+ has begun experimental support for SHA-256 object IDs. Due to backward compatibility, full migration will take time.
Is a longer hash always more secure?
Generally yes — longer output means a larger search space and lower collision probability. But security also depends on algorithm design. SHA-256 (256 bits) is far more secure than MD5 (128 bits), not just because it's longer but because the algorithm design is superior.
Does the same file produce the same hash on different operating systems?
As long as file contents are byte-for-byte identical, the hash will be the same on any OS and any tool. But watch out for text file line-ending differences — Windows uses CRLF (\r\n), Linux/Mac uses LF (\n), which produces different hashes for text files.
Try the Tool Now
This cheat sheet compares five major hash algorithms across output length, security level, speed, and typical use cases — see all differences in one table.