• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

CPR W3 on Hairworks(Nvidia Game Works)-'the code of this feature cannot be optimized for AMD'

humbug said:
Yes it is and no thats not what i said, Bullet is not tied to any one vendor, it does not care if its AMD, Nvidia, Intel, Qualcomm or ARM.

You need one or another Physics engine to make Physics effects, the difference is you can make the effects you are already familiar with or whatever your imagination can muster from scratch.

The thing with a thing like Game Works is its a set of prefabricated libraries, its pretty much just "chose one and paste"

Its a bit like buying a picnic hamper, open it, chose, stuff yer face.

Its cheap and easy, which of course is a benefit to the developer, its also a benefit to the Vendor (Nvidia / AMD) who created these libraries because it ends up as something thats visually recognised as brand specific, it in its self becomes an advert.

The down side is it kinda dumbs down developers who have little incentive to be creative, invent something new. be original.

But more to the point these libraries can then be used as a tool to undermine your competition in ways that are now being argued is happening.
Click to expand...

But why use Bullet? Why not re-write that too? Make it really specific for what you want.
Maybe Bullet isn't completely vendor agnostic either.

Where do you draw the line? Coincidentally at the Nvidia library you don't like?
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
But why use Bullet? Why not re-write that too? Make it really specific for what you want.
Maybe Bullet isn't completely vendor agnostic either.

Where do you draw the line? Coincidentally at the Nvidia library you don't like?
Click to expand...

The answer's to that question is in the post you quoted.

What the...:confused:
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
You don't need to use an existing one, you could write one (after all someone had to).
If you don't want to use a 3rd party library for one thing, why use one for the other?
Click to expand...

I can't, i wouldn't even know where to start.

Bullet is what i'm looking for.
 
humbug said:
I can't, i wouldn't even know where to start.

Bullet is what i'm looking for.
Click to expand...

Maybe GameWorks is what these developers are looking for?

You say they shouldn't be lazy and should write their own stuff, but then you don't want to write your own physics API.

So the level of laziness you seem to accept, coincidentally, perfectly matches what is needed to not use an Nvidia technology. Shocking!

Oh and wouldn't you know it, Bullet was written by an AMD employee...
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Maybe GameWorks is what these developers are looking for?

You say they shouldn't be lazy and should write their own stuff, but then you don't want to write your own physics API.

So the level of laziness you seem to accept, coincidentally, perfectly matches what is needed to not use an Nvidia technology. Shocking!

Oh and wouldn't you know it, Bullet was written by an AMD employee...
Click to expand...

Bullet has been around for years and what you don't seem to understand it was started while the chap worked at Sony pictures,so basically is closely related to Sony more than AMD.Its been used in films like Sherlock Holmes,Shrek 4 and the like.

It is part of many 3D Authoring tools like Blender and Maya.

BTW,whether you agree or disagree with Humbug,he actually has experience in trying to develop his own game project,and there is a log of his work somewhere on this site. Heck,when I was asking some questions about what card to buy for Blender(basically whether OpenCL and CUDA performance was comparable),he pointed me to the Nvidia ones,as he said that the CUDA based tools were more mature than the OpenCL based ones,and he ran some benchmarks between his R9 290 and a Nvidia card he had to prove the point.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Bullet has been around for years and what you don't seem to understand it was started while the chap worked at Sony pictures,so basically is closely related to Sony more than AMD.Its been used in films like Sherlock Holmes,Shrek 4 and the like.

It is part of many 3D Authoring tools like Blender and Maya.

BTW,whether you agree or disagree with Humbug,he actually has experience in trying to develop his own game project,and there is a log of his work somewhere on this site. Heck,when I was asking some questions about what card to buy for Blender(basically whether OpenCL and CUDA performance was comparable),he pointed me to the Nvidia ones,as he said that the CUDA based tools were more mature than the OpenCL based ones,and he ran some benchmarks between his R9 290 and a Nvidia card he had to prove the point.
Click to expand...

And how do you know what my experience is? (Just because I'm not linking to stuff in my sig)?
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
Oh and wouldn't you know it, Bullet was written by an AMD employee...
Click to expand...

GoogalyMoogaly said:
And how do you know what my experience is? (Just because I'm not linking to stuff in my sig)?
Click to expand...

Well,the fact you tried to make Bullet seem like something AMD developed,when it wasn't. The Bullet project was started at Sony in 2005. Since you are an expert in all of these sorts of things,funny you failed to mention that in your previous post,right??

Or the fact the guy you were talking about does not even work for AMD now,but works for Google. Oh and its Open Source too.

So what is it now? Sony conspiracy? AMD one? Google? Lizard people??

Unless you think it is some mighty conspiracy that things like Poser,Maya,Blender,Lightwave,Cinema 4D(Maxon is also behind CineBench) and almost every one of the main 3D authoring packages have Bullet physics support. It must be to screw over Intel and Nvidia.

Funny how a physics project started by a massive company with a deep involvement in the motion picture industry,ends up being reasonably widespread.

But,anyway I am sure you will have the last word and it will be another case of going around in circles like a dog trying to catch its tail. Yawn.

I will concede this as a mighty victory for you,just since I think it will make you feel better,and I can see where this will go. No where.
 
Last edited:
http://www.bulletphysics.org/Bullet/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=18&t=79

Bullet 0.2 SDK release, 2005 August 6, Back when iirc the guy worked for sony

http://icrontic.com/article/nvidias-take-on-amds-open-source-bullet-physics

Icrontic: Does NVIDIA intend to support Bullet Physics, as it is based on open industry standards which NVIDIA supports?

Tom Petersen: NVIDIA does support Bullet (we met with Erwin at [The GPU Technology Conference]). We like any software or API that makes it easier for anyone to use GPUs more effectively. As a matter of fact according to Erwin (the creator of Bullet) he uses NV GPUs to develop his code – He even provided a quote for us to that effect:

“Bullet’s GPU acceleration via OpenCL will work with any compliant drivers, we use NVIDIA GeForce cards for our development and even use code from their OpenCL SDK, they are a great technology partner.”

Erwin Coumans,
Creator of the Bullet Physics Engine
Click to expand...

Doubt he was using Nvidia gpu's working at AMD :)
 
whyscotty said:
This seems to point to AMD developing it :confused:

http://icrontic.com/article/nvidias-take-on-amds-open-source-bullet-physics
Click to expand...

http://home.seekscale.com/blog/bullet-physics-current-state-and-whats-next

The Bullet Physics project started at Sony and was made open source in 2005, so about 10 years ago.
Bullet is under active development and used in games, movie visual effects and robotics.
Click to expand...

We decided to publish an article about Bullet Physics, a physics engine written by Erwin Coumans (now working at Google). Bullet Physics SDK is used by NASA, Disney, and several game engines.
Bullet Physics received recently an Academy Award, and Erwin Coumans kindly accepted to give us a quick interview in his overcrowded agenda.
Click to expand...

What was your strategy as regards performance for real time?

There are a lot of optimization methods that we tried and used in various projects and hardware platforms. This ranges from reducing the memory use, using better algorithms, using SIMD vector instructions, multi threading and porting the code to GPGPU using CUDA and OpenCL. We described the GPGPU optimizations in a book "MultiThreading for Visual Effects".
Click to expand...

The guy is at Google.

Bullet has been around for a long time.

Its used by all the major 3D authoring packages.

Just have a quick look even on the short wiki page:
3D Authoring tools

Blender—A free 3D production suite that uses Bullet physics for animations and its internal game engine, the Blender Game Engine.
Carrara (software) added Bullet Physics in Pro version 8 .[22]
Cheetah3D, a 3D modeling, rendering and animation software for Apple Mac OS X uses the Bullet physics engine to simulate rigid body and soft body dynamics. (As of version 6.0.)
Cinema 4D version 11.5 uses Bullet as part of MoDynamics.[23]
Houdini has native Bullet Physics support in the dynamics context as of version 12. Available as an community supported open source plugin for previous versions.
LightWave 3D CORE.[24] LightWave 11 also uses Bullet Dynamics for its physics.
Modo Recoil Allows users to simulate dynamic rigid body interactions based upon the popular Open Source Bullet Physics Library
MikuMikuDance a freeware 3D animation program, added the use of Bullet Physics Engine in version 5
Poser versions 10 and Pro 2014 introduced a Bullet Physics-based 'Live mode' for simulating rigid and soft body dynamics while editing the scene
Softimage plugin Momentum developed by Helge Mathee and distributed by Exocortex
Golaem Crowd plugin for Maya developed by Golaem[25]
Click to expand...


That list includes the major 3D authoring packages in both commercial and amateur use today.

Going from the responses in this thread,I get the impression most appear not to be aware about Bullet,which is well known. Its been used in motion pictures.

Tonester0011 said:
Just because he's used the tools for an hour or two doesn't make him an expet.
Click to expand...

Neither,does it make the people argueing with him. Its bordering hilarity that such a well known physics API is some sort of AMD conspiracy and really does bode well for the actual knowledge of people if they are trying to twist it somehow.

I would have been quite happy to let you lot just argue among yourself,but its plain distortion to make Bullet some AMD thing. It isn't.


Its Open Source,meaning some of the posters have just negated a whole community of active contributors for the project.

It has active contribution from multiple companies and individuals and looking at the response from a certain person,they really don't understand what it is at all. Its bordering on clutching at straws, it really is.

Its like saying since Android is based on the Linux kernal,that Linux is some Google conspiracy to put down Microsoft... But wait,MS has contributed too,must be some conspiracy to put down Apple. But wait Microsoft has shares in Apple..

Even AMD has made contribution to Linux,is it an AMD conspiracy now??

Serious,the guy works for Google now??

Now Bullet is some Google conspiracy?

If they could show their backgrounds and experience on projects,at least there would be confidence as opposed to "its humbug" lets have a poke with him,although at times he does not help himself,LOL. Plus I don't really tend to always agree with him,but on the flip side it does not make him always wrong all the time either.

People like Rroff ,I have some faith in,since at least from what he said I tend to agree with,since what he says actually seems to be line with what the odd game dev I bumped into said. One or two of you may actually like what they said about Nvidia against AMD from a dev viewpoint. But we will leave that for another internet argument.

I am not going to bother really answering anymore in this thread,since its probably gone on a Ross Noble like tangent and I am not helping either.

Plus its a lovely day and I need to do stuff.
 
Last edited:
I don't think PhysX was started at Nvidia either, but it's still referred to as an Nvidia technology (admittedly they did buy it but it didn't start there).
The point is Bullet has been touched by AMD and must therefore be included in the list of holier-than-thou software.

I'm just trying to figure out why developers using pre-made software (like GameWorks) is bad, but using pre-made software (like Blender/Maya and Bullet physics) isn't.

Does it all come down to the limits of what Humbug has done in his little project?
 
GoogalyMoogaly said:
I don't think PhysX was started at Nvidia either, but it's still referred to as an Nvidia technology (admittedly they did buy it but it didn't start there).
The point is Bullet has been touched by AMD and must therefore be included in the list of holier-than-thou software.

I'm just trying to figure out why developers using pre-made software (like GameWorks) is bad, but using pre-made software (like Blender/Maya and Bullet physics) isn't.

Does it all come down to the limits of what Humbug has done in his little project?
Click to expand...

Gameworks is hard/unreasonable to optimise if your not Nvidia, where as The others are more open and can be optimised by either side.
But IMO better a dev uses gameworks even if its not great for one side than they skip those extra effects completely. I'd assume gameworks is easier to implement and why its used by some(not getting into the whole they paid, no the other side paid debate)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom