|
|
Re: Which physics engine do you want for Gamestudio?
[Re: jcl]
#204258
04/28/08 09:45
04/28/08 09:45
|
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 337
Vadim647
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 337
|
I vote for bullet, because it start lagging only on 3000 boxes and isn't 20mb size. Newer PhysX. Personaly, I hate when with 5mb game comes 20mb driver. It's quite annoying. Newton 2 is no need because it's easy used by plugin. Waiting for Microsoft to release some physics - <lol>, have you seen their Microsoft Physics Illustrator? It's poor and lagged.
I switched to other account since marth 2010. Guess which.
|
|
|
Re: Which physics engine do you want for Gamestudio?
[Re: Vadim647]
#204261
04/28/08 09:57
04/28/08 09:57
|
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,211
Ä°stanbul, Turkey
Quad
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Oct 2007
Posts: 5,211
Ä°stanbul, Turkey
|
I dont know how licensing will work but Havoc will be released soon. It is more powerful than physx(imo) and doesnt need a driver.
As in the listed ones, i also voted for the Bullet.
edit: then i want to switch my vote from bullet to physx.
Last edited by Quadraxas; 04/30/08 09:53.
3333333333
|
|
|
Re: Which physics engine do you want for Gamestudio?
[Re: Core]
#204293
04/28/08 14:58
04/28/08 14:58
|
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 681
Massachusetts, USA
Ichiro
User
|
User
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 681
Massachusetts, USA
|
Just some info about each (from various sources), since I had no clue about them: PhysX:PhysX can refer either to a proprietary realtime physics engine middleware SDK developed by AGEIA (formerly known as the NovodeX SDK) or their PPU expansion card designed to accelerate that SDK. Only games that use the PhysX SDK can benefit from the presence of a PhysX card. Games using the PhysX SDK can be accelerated by either a PhysX PPU or a CUDA enabled GeForce GPU.
Sony has licensed the PhysX SDK for their PlayStation 3 video game console.
The PhysX engine and SDK is freely available for Windows and Linux systems, but hardware acceleration only currently works on Windows.
In February 2008, nVidia bought AGEIA and the PhysX engine and is integrating it into its CUDA framework, which already has multiple drivers for Linux. With Intel's cancellation of Havok FX, PhysX on CUDA is currently the only available solution for effect physics processing on a GPU. Newton Game Dynamics is a free, but closed source physics engine for realistically simulating rigid bodies in games and other real-time applications. In contrast to most other real-time physics engines it goes for accuracy over speed. Its solver is deterministic and not based on traditional LCP or iterative methods. The advantages are that it can handle higher mass ratios (up to 400:1) and the simulation is very robust and easy to tune. The disadvantage is that it is a bit slower than physics engines with an iterative solver.
Many non-commercial, commercial and academic projects use Newton Game Dynamics. It is a popular choice in the Irrlicht and OGRE communities. Bullet is a professional open source multi-threaded 3D Collision Detection and Rigid Body Dynamics Library. It is free for commercial use under the ZLib license.
The library is being used by several professional game developers on PC, PlayStation 3, XBox 360 and Nintendo Wii.
Sony Computer Entertainment provides a parallel SPU optimized version, and collaborations with IBM, Intel, AMD and NVidia to exploit their parallel hardware.
Bullet is native part of Blender 3D modeler and it supports COLLADA Physics file format. Given that nVidia is now tossing mad money at Physx development, I think that'd be the way to go. They're integrating it into their PPUs (and, should it become a de facto standard, it'll ultimately work well with other PPUs). It's also being used in a number of high-profile titles such as Medal of Honor: Airborne, Unreal Tournament 3, GRAW, etc. But the three engines are all probably pretty decent for general purpose.
|
|
|
Re: Which physics engine do you want for Gamestudio?
[Re: TWO]
#204317
04/28/08 17:44
04/28/08 17:44
|
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
amy
Senior Member
|
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 353
|
Even a 3MB driver is unacceptable to me. Every project you release will need this driver. Why can´t it simply be a dll or lib like all other physics engines? No one owns this physics card flop anyway. What does "next-gen" mean?  I already said it in the other thread but "next-gen" is nothing but marketing nonsense. It makes absolutely no sense. I agree that it probably will become better with nVidia. But since CUDA is free, the other engines also will support GPUs sooner or later. They're integrating it into their PPUs (and, should it become a de facto standard, it'll ultimately work well with other PPUs). nVidia won´t build PPUs and it won´t bake physics into hardware. GPUs already are very fast vector processors which can be used for physics via CUDA (and of course the CUDA technology will be improved in future generations).
|
|
|
|
