o1hash is a gimmick. And that's way faster than a CPU can load or store data so you can't do anything with it.

When we look at hashes mentioned in this discussion where people are trying to be fast, blake3 is at 3000MB/s when vectorized, and cityhash, murmurhash, and siphash range from 5x faster to 2x slower if I take the smhasher numbers. There's not that much difference.

But also the number we need here is the latency of a small hash, not the max throughput. If blake3 takes 250 cycles for that, how much faster do you think you can go? You can't fit a reasonable hash into 10 cycles. You can't even fit o1hash into 10 cycles. And all of those numbers are pretty fast for most purposes.

AES-NI is a great tool! But isn't that arguing in favor of a crypto hash?