PhysX

[d3lta 10]

Batman AA is the worst example of a PhysX bad implementation ,see :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqAWYiop3nA

Performance issues is a another problem, SPH (or particle effects) performance is concern in CPU mode (aka Radeon Users).... =(

Edited October 8, 2011 by D3lta

[soldier2390 0]

Can a BIS Dev confirm if something simular will be featured in Arma3? Meaning "Cloth" Physics, or what ever its called?

Dave,

[Steakslim 1]

honestly at this stage, i don't see cloth physics being in the game. It's a visual bonus that doesn't offer anything to the game other than more work for the hardware. Not to say it wouldn't make things look nice with some atmosphere, but in the ArmA series at this time it probably wouldn't be a good idea. We're already getting ragdoll, vehicle, and buoyancy physics which is more than I ever expected from them.

[PuFu 4600]

Can a BIS Dev confirm if something simular will be featured in Arma3? Meaning "Cloth" Physics, or what ever its called?

Dave,

no need for a dev to confirm: there won't be cloth physics in A3...

[NeMeSiS 11]

no need for a dev to confirm: there won't be cloth physics in A3...

Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

[Gerwazy 10]

I just want to have ragdoll animation on radeon card and maybe some rivers or streams.

[Leon86 13]

There's not going to be a difference in physics between ati and nvidia in arma 3.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

Hehe, so true :)

[liquidpinky 11]

Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

The wind sock in Take On Helis is pretty realistic, there was no mention of PhysX being used either.

[neokika 62]

Not even on flags? :p

Back in the day i was really impressed with the OFP flag physics. :D

That's not physics driven but a simple animation playing over and over again with the speed depending on wind strength.

_neo_

[Pulverizer 1]

That's not physics driven but a simple animation playing over and over again with the speed depending on wind strength.

_neo_

You are wrong:

class CfgCloth
{
class Flag
{
	//stepSize = 0.002; // high end - perfect stable
	stepSize = 0.005; // stable
	//stepSize = 0.01; // nearly stable
	//stepSize = 0.02; // slightly unstable
	colPoints = 14; // number of knots in x-direction
	rowPoints = 14; // number of knots in y-direction

	stretchCoef = 1000;  // stretch force coeficient
	fricCoef = 1; // friction coeficient
	windCoef = 20; // wind coeficient
	gravCoef = 1; // gravity coeficient
};
};

Stability refers to physics going crazy, usually due to a too slow simulation interval, ie stepSize, (too much cloth stretching between cycles, over-penetration etc). If it were an animation or a simple "plasma" pattern, instead of being driven by physics, it would not go unstable at any playback rate. It doesn't have collisions, but it has some physics.

Edited October 13, 2011 by Pulverizer
clarification

[Flogger23m 2]

I've asked it before, but I just want to be clear:

1) Physx will produce the same physics on AMD/ATI cards in ArmA3, correct?

I am assuming this is true, as it uses software Physx opposed to GPU.

2) Will AMD see a performance hit?

I believe it will, because AMD cards that run software Physx are held back if I recall correctly, meaning that a an Nvidia/AMD card that are otherwise equally fast will show a slight performance increase in the Nvidia cards performance.

If that is wrong, correct me.

I am looking at getting either a GTX 560ti 2GB or HD 69502GB, and I wish I knew what the performance difference was in ArmA 3.

[vuckotadic 10]

I've asked it before, but I just want to be clear:

1) Physx will produce the same physics on AMD/ATI cards in ArmA3, correct?

I am assuming this is true, as it uses software Physx opposed to GPU.

2) Will AMD see a performance hit?

I believe it will, because AMD cards that run software Physx are held back if I recall correctly, meaning that a an Nvidia/AMD card that are otherwise equally fast will show a slight performance increase in the Nvidia cards performance.

If that is wrong, correct me.

I am looking at getting either a GTX 560ti 2GB or HD 69502GB, and I wish I knew what the performance difference was in ArmA 3.

PhysX will run on CPU, it doesn't matter which GPU you have.

[Pulverizer 1]

1. Yes.

2. I don't think so.

Using GPU physics for simple rigid bodies and such can actually slow down the performance because a part of the GPU stream processors will not be available for graphics rendering, but are wasted on a task a CPU would be easily capable of. Case in point, Shattered Horizon.

The advantage of GPU physics is realized when you have massively parallel physics. Like the stuff you see in Mafia II, Mirror's Edge, Batman and the like with GPU PhysX enabled.

[Leon86 13]

physx will run on cpu, it doesn't matter which gpu you have.

+1000

[4 IN 1 0]

Using GPU physics for simple rigid bodies and such can actually slow down the performance because a part of the GPU stream processors will not be available for graphics rendering, but are wasted on a task a CPU would be easily capable of. Case in point, Shattered Horizon.

But no body actually tried and see what will happen, right?:confused:

[Pulverizer 1]

Many people experimented with it in SH, but I don't have a clue if BIS has done so with A3. Probably?

[Leon86 13]

Many people experimented with it in SH, but I don't have a clue if BIS has done so with A3. Probably?

Nope, will be cpu only.

And gpu physX usually doesn't really slow the rendering down, the added particles means there is more rendering to do.

[Pulverizer 1]

Nope, will be cpu only.

And gpu physX usually doesn't really slow the rendering down, the added particles means there is more rendering to do.

Yeah, A3 will most likely be CPU only. That doesn't mean BIS couldn't test how the performance would be with GPU physics.

And unless you have more information about their own game than Futuremark, you are wrong about "added particles" being the reason for the slowdown in Shattered Horizon. SH doesn't add anything with GPU PhysX enabled, it simply runs the same stuff on either GPU or CPU. I think Trine is similar, no difference between visuals even though it supports both CPU and GPU PhysX.

For many other games, the statement would be somewhat true however.

Edited December 1, 2011 by Pulverizer

[Leon86 13]

I once read on the trine forum they couln't get physx to run stable on the gpu, maybe they've fixed it now.

[BasileyOne 10]

physx easy to use and look good on paper, but bogus and buggy.

sorry if thats offend anyone [from developers of both].

basically ANY kind of 3-rd party code in project lead to severe drawbacks.

and PhysX not very scalable. so for BF3-sized or CoD-sized stuff with low-res/low-frequency physics its more or less work, but for something serious ? not with nowdays generations of hardware :/

[neokika 62]

physx easy to use and look good on paper, but bogus and buggy.

sorry if thats offend anyone [from developers of both].

basically ANY kind of 3-rd party code in project lead to severe drawbacks.

and PhysX not very scalable. so for BF3-sized or CoD-sized stuff with low-res/low-frequency physics its more or less work, but for something serious ? not with nowdays generations of hardware :/

Then I guess you will be very surprised...

Care to base your thoughts with actual facts?

_neo_

[dm 9]

physx easy to use and look good on paper, but bogus and buggy.

sorry if thats offend anyone [from developers of both].

basically ANY kind of 3-rd party code in project lead to severe drawbacks.

and PhysX not very scalable. so for BF3-sized or CoD-sized stuff with low-res/low-frequency physics its more or less work, but for something serious ? not with nowdays generations of hardware :/

Yay armchair specialists

[maddogx 13]

Yay armchair specialists

That's Captain Armchair Specialist you're referring to! You shall address him thusly. ;)

[BasileyOne 10]

Then I guess you will be very surprised...

Care to base your thoughts with actual facts?

_neo_

how many products with PhysX you made ?

you already tired enough to check some PhysX-related gamedeve threads in Nvidia-related forums. nothing is free so picking something in hope "now we're spend shitload of money on this magical, "silver bullet product" all us problems was suddenly disappear" ? no, its won't work this way. as well as PhysX won't frequently[as advertised]. but im really welcome BIS efforts and enthusiasm on improving physics ingame, whatever they use for that. as well as other aspects of game.

p.s. i wish i was wrong.

and some time ago, PhysX was [suddenly!!]become flawless product.

until that moment, i will keep My opinion, if you not have anything against.

ie until Arma3 release, at least.