• 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.

Real-time Physics using i7

"Maxing out an i7", where does the AI amongst other things go? what about those with slower dual or tri core without Hyperthreading?

You could do the same if not more using less than 10% of a modern day GPU, this could be done in games today using GPU acceleration with very little hit, CPU's are a long way off producing the above level of effects in actual games.
 
Last edited:
That is quite impressive.

My own little physics engine using 2 cores on a Q6600 for physics (the other cores are used for rendering, backend, etc). Maxes out at about 500 objects doing similiar stuff and they were getting upto 3500+. Tho I am using higher physics accuracy then they appear to be.
 
Last edited:
Physics on GPU is normally just eyecandy... Its nice, but the AI doesnt always get feedback on whats going to happen next, so its not truely interactive. Physics on the CPU does make sence, once the average joe's PC has enough cores to actually handle it properly.
 
Physics on the GPU can be fully integrated into the game geometry, etc. its only "eyecandy" incidental effects at the moment because no one hardware GPU API has broad enough market coverage... for developers to even consider using it exclusively.

The Async nature isn't a problem with good program design.
 
Final8y said:
Ok now in the game with AI.

http://www.hardocp.com/news.html?news=MzkwMjUsLCxoZW50aHVzaWFzdCwsLDE=
Click to expand...

Ohh very nice. Obviously it's lacking the typical GPU accelerated shinies and things like realistic cloth tearing, but then you have all these objects flying around that you can actually interact with - and at the end of the day, what's really more valuable gameplay wise? It actually looks like quite a fun game, too, which is certainly a step forward in terms of heavily physics oriented games.
 
Mega impressed by the second video. Looks like it's going to be a pretty good game for the techies!

(Though we do risk having a load of dual-core users complaining the game runs like arse)
 
mmj_uk said:
Yep the number of concurrent physics effects is obviously scaled down significantly from the original video.

Objects also seem to lack a bit of mavity and there's a bit of slowdown but it could just be my laptop, it would have been interesting to see them disrupt the boxes at the end 80% on all cores with barely an object in motion.
Click to expand...

To be frank, all the stuff about GPU acceleration is all well and good but there's not much to show for PhysX now is there? The best games with some sort of physics are all ones which are CPU driven (Crysis etc)...

How long have we been waiting now for PhysX to deliver something?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom