Terracide

Last I spoke with Erwin Coumans he stated that GPU support wouldn't come untill bullet SDK 3.x. I would like to se your source for GPU acceleration in SDK 2.x?

Not as sad as the whining of AMD's fans over features they can't run... ---------- Post added at 12:09 AM ---------- Previous post was at 12:07 AM ---------- Since Bullet 3.0 SDK isn't out, it hard to code for...right? I have seen tech demos from Ati/AMD since 2006. I am tired of techdemos...put up or shut up AMD...

Yes they are. Bulletphysics != AMD Bullet 3.0 (GPU physics) is still not out = just talk. They have adopted ATi's line...they promised (back in 2006) GPU physics in a few months...nothing has happend....except a lot of FUD, talk and empty PR. Why do people who think PhysX is BAD...and AMD is just around the corner with their own CPU physics solution always show a lack of insight in the topic? ---------- Post added at 11:56 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:54 PM ---------- Anything that makes my favourite mil-sim more REALISTIC is a bonus for me. You are advocating less realism...because AMD is doing nothing. If you want less realism...you can always play CoD...problem solved.

I certainly hoped that BIS hasn't botched their PhysX implementation so that they only offer CPU physics...

Why should the minority ditacte the performance for the majority? Don't blame BIS...blame AMD...for doing nothing but talk about GPU-physics.

There is a reason too why AMD really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really would like to have GPU physics too: Performance. It like night and day between the CPU and GPU in physics.

I knew that FUD would come. It's been debunked ages ago: http://scalibq.wordpress.com/2010/09/17/physx-an-easy-target/ http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=30102764&postcount=46 And is not true anyone (even if it was debunked): http://physxinfo.com/news/5671/physx-sdk-3-0-has-been-released/ Like I figured...ignorance and lies are the opponents of PhysX. ---------- Post added at 05:01 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:58 PM ---------- You think simple rigig bodies physics will impress me? Come back when Havok does this (tearable cloth): Or this: Or this: Ignorance is a bad foundation. Please don't waste my time with more ignorance. ---------- Post added at 11:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:13 PM ---------- Document this..or I will call you the fanboy..and put your ramblings on ignore.

It's a simple matter of performance (or the lack of performance). Would you like a setting that would enable full PhysX effect on the CPU...if that meant you had to play at 3-4 FPS, because your CPU simply isn't up for the task? :) GPU > CPU for SIMD A GPU creams a CPU in physics calculations...those are the hard facts.

That is a lie...I dare you to prove it! (a link to realworldtechnologies would be a own goal from your side...do some digging ;)) And you are balming the wrong people. Why should gamign stand still, just because AMD cann't get their own GPU physics up and runnning? Cart before horse...not bright.

FYP: http://store.steampowered.com/hwsurvey/ ---------- Post added at 10:10 PM ---------- Previous post was at 10:08 PM ---------- Even a quadcore CPU is inferior comaprd to a GPU for SIMD (physcis) Ask yourself this: Would you render your graphics on your CPU? It's the same issue...a CPU is "ok" for everything...but excells at nothing.

Brisant is fun :D Used to have this puppy along in former-Yugoslavia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Gustav_recoilless_rifle HE, HEDP, Starburst, HEAT, Smoke. Only downside, with the M/79, gear ect, you could only (within reason) run along with 2 shells....but good for nasty punch or light/cover

It i limited to burst as a full fire would wear down the barrels: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GAU-8_Avenger#Design

You play ARMA2 with a crackbox controller? :eek: Talk about LACK of control-fidelity :rolleyes: