If you say so
p.s. it's 'hilarious'
I hate Google spelling checker, it's spelling is worse than mine, lol...
-
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.
what do u think on physic x?
- Thread starter hobib_ali
- Start date
I hate Google spelling checker, it's spelling is worse than mine, lol...
Last edited:
It works fine for me.
"Its"
You swine I was just about to have fun with that one as well!
Associate
- Joined
- 15 Oct 2012
- Posts
- 11
Gonna do 4 benchmark comparisons this week.
1st - i3 530 2.9Ghz @ 3.5Ghz, 8Gb Corsair, MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition, SSD, 650w OCZ PSU
2nd - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition, SSD, 850w Corsair PSU
3rd - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, 2x MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition Xfire, SSD, 850w Corsair PSU
4th - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, 2x MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition Xfire with GeForce GTX 550Ti 1Gb Dedicated Physx , SSD, 850w Corsair
Will post my findings in a new thread. Going to use various resources: 3DMark11, Vantage, an assortment of games that have their own benchmarking utility.
Should be fun!
Edit: 850w gonna be enough for 3 cards?
1st - i3 530 2.9Ghz @ 3.5Ghz, 8Gb Corsair, MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition, SSD, 650w OCZ PSU
2nd - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition, SSD, 850w Corsair PSU
3rd - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, 2x MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition Xfire, SSD, 850w Corsair PSU
4th - i7 3770k @4.4Ghz, 16gb Corsair, 2x MSI 7850 2Gb Power Edition Xfire with GeForce GTX 550Ti 1Gb Dedicated Physx , SSD, 850w Corsair
Will post my findings in a new thread. Going to use various resources: 3DMark11, Vantage, an assortment of games that have their own benchmarking utility.
Should be fun!
Edit: 850w gonna be enough for 3 cards?
Last edited:
AMD has Havok
If we are all adults then grow up and don't correct peoples use of language on an internet forum.
A great man once said:
"Your point is only as good as your ability to communicate it effectively..."
Grammar/spelling policing is a little bit sad but no more so than discussing graphics cards on a hardware forum so it's all good
.
"Your point is only as good as your ability to communicate it effectively..."
Grammar/spelling policing is a little bit sad but no more so than discussing graphics cards on a hardware forum so it's all good
.
Latest versions of bullet are quite impressive - able to do most of the effects in batman AA on the CPU and still hold around 60fps in similiarly detailed scenes (if anyone knows their physics as a developer this is quite an achievement) and adding some quite decent softbody capabilities - however its still more suited to movie type physics and can take a bit of hacking up to make it work nicely in a gaming environment tho it seems that is something they are slowly tweaking for to. However it still can't do many of the more advanced physics simulations such as fluid dynamics like physx can and retain realtime viable performance on the CPU. I think the future looks quite strong for bullet tho.
Havok isn't even close to the functionality of PhysX and last time I checked entirely lacked a functional and stable hardware implementation. I also find it quite clunky to work around in games with objects tending to "stick" or block you quite often. PhysX can sometimes be a little too cartoony "bouncing ball" physics but they don't tend to get in the way of gameplay which IMO is a better solution.
Last edited:
Physx is a very nice bit of kit. It can produce some very nice effects when used pervasively in a game (I remember trying out Cryostasis with my trusty old GTX285, mediocre game but gorgeous fluid dynamics even at that point).
However, aside from Cryostasis I cannot think of any games that use it pervasively enough to leverage it's strengths. Borderlands 2 is usually an arguing point, but it is a single game amongst a huuuuge market, and even then it does offer phsyx functionality as an option which will run managably on the CPU. very few games use it for anything other than small, rather gimmicky effects. I would not base a buying choice on it, I would go purely by price and the games you wanted to play.
However, aside from Cryostasis I cannot think of any games that use it pervasively enough to leverage it's strengths. Borderlands 2 is usually an arguing point, but it is a single game amongst a huuuuge market, and even then it does offer phsyx functionality as an option which will run managably on the CPU. very few games use it for anything other than small, rather gimmicky effects. I would not base a buying choice on it, I would go purely by price and the games you wanted to play.
AMD don't "have" Havok, Havok is owned by Intel.
Can you also explain to me what age has to do with wanting people to put a bit of effort in and not use awful shorthand has to do with age, and how "growing up" would solve anything?
I think you've just demonstrated you don't really know what "grow up" means or how to use it because if anything you'd call me an old fuddy duddy for moaning about the kids using that new fangled "text speak".
What exactly is "movie type physics"?
Physics should be physics, no? If you're referring to the type of effects, then why wouldn't Bullet be able to do fluid dynamics? That should be pretty important for "movie physics".
I can't help but feel that you know a little bit and use that to your advantage to make it seem like you know a lot more than you actually do. In a few of your posts I've read recently, it seems like you've typed a lot but haven't really said anything.
How things behave should be entirely down to the implementation of physics on that specific project, and even then it should really be down to object properties rather than the physics implementation itself.