Physics lib disscussion(&Poll)
Physics lib disscussion(&Poll)
Hi. I've used Newton for my last game project, but i know there are other libs out there.
So i thought i'd start a thread to figure out the pros and cons of the different libs, and see which one is most popular.
If you have any experience with a phys. lib, please share it!
Bullet:
+Free
+Open Source
+Used in PS3 apps.
+Still early stage of development
+Good documentation
Newton:
+Easy to get started with
PhysX:
-Additional dependencies
Havok:
+Uses GPGPU to do the same thing as the PhysX-card
So i thought i'd start a thread to figure out the pros and cons of the different libs, and see which one is most popular.
If you have any experience with a phys. lib, please share it!
Bullet:
+Free
+Open Source
+Used in PS3 apps.
+Still early stage of development
+Good documentation
Newton:
+Easy to get started with
PhysX:
-Additional dependencies
Havok:
+Uses GPGPU to do the same thing as the PhysX-card
Last edited by Luben on Mon Jun 04, 2007 2:54 pm, edited 4 times in total.
If you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all.
-
- Posts: 1029
- Joined: Thu Apr 06, 2006 12:45 am
- Location: Tennesee, USA
- Contact:
-
- Posts: 199
- Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 4:07 am
I use Newton because I couldn't find any better free engine (PhysX requires installing some additional stuff so I threw it away). And believe me, Havok is the best of them all if you don't look at the costs.
People say "PhysX is better because..." but ask yourself, which of those cool things run so cool without the PhysX hardware? Havok can turn your second graphics card into the same thing as PhysX HW, so when a game doesn't use PhysX (which means "when yu don't play CellFactor or Bet on Soldier") the HW lies unused, but with Havok, when you don't play a Havok game (there are many) you simply have two g-cards
I still don't know about TrueAxis. Has anybody used it? How does it stand?
In my opinion a physics engine should be primarily ranked by the number of simple rigid boxes it can handle before having the FPS dropped by 50%, then by it's features (convexes, fluids, demolision etc.)
People say "PhysX is better because..." but ask yourself, which of those cool things run so cool without the PhysX hardware? Havok can turn your second graphics card into the same thing as PhysX HW, so when a game doesn't use PhysX (which means "when yu don't play CellFactor or Bet on Soldier") the HW lies unused, but with Havok, when you don't play a Havok game (there are many) you simply have two g-cards
I still don't know about TrueAxis. Has anybody used it? How does it stand?
In my opinion a physics engine should be primarily ranked by the number of simple rigid boxes it can handle before having the FPS dropped by 50%, then by it's features (convexes, fluids, demolision etc.)