Rage engine is the only worth mentioning, just like U3E by physx.

Bullet 2.81 was released ~ 6 months before publication of those tests. So it was quite new. And even PhysX 2.8.4, that is ~ 2 years old, beats Bullet in many cases (you can notice that if you'll read the article, not the first page). P.S. All purely on CPU, those benchmarks do not include features that can be GPU accelerated.

I once tested Bullet sdk and made a video, now I see its already 4 years old.. It ran in cpu mode @ q9450 3.6ghz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-GTRr6OrLE anyway does it matter? physx3 is late to the party that's all, at least they fixed it and yes took long, guess they also waited for u4e with flex injection.

Rage engine is the only worth mentioning, just like U3E by physx. I once tested Bullet sdk and made a video, now I see its already 4 years old.. It ran in cpu mode @ q9450 3.6ghz http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K-GTRr6OrLE anyway does it matter? physx3 is late to the party that's all, at least they fixed it and yes took long, guess they also waited for u4e with flex injection.

Lol you made this video? This pretty much proves you're the hunter. I clearly remember him posting this and saying he made it. Not to mention the youtube account is "TheDigitalHunter" lol... http://forums.guru3d.com/showpost.php?p=3818977&postcount=49 Also while PhysX maybe behind in some stuff it's definitely ahead in library size. They have tons of default effects built for like every single scenario. Tim Sweeney had a good UE4 post about it -- it's basically the sole reason they went with it instead of coming up with their own.

anyway does it matter? physx3 is late to the party that's all, at least they fixed it and yes took long, guess they also waited for u4e with flex injection.

PhysX integrated in UE, the most prevalent engine BY FAR, but it's late to the party?? WTH that makes zero sense. And don't make us laugh with Bullet. PhysX, as badly handled as it was by Nvidia, its still light years ahead of everything else. Bullet does not even get a mention lol The main difference being, you can't just make something new and expect devs will use it (Bullet). You have to make them, one way or another, kinda like AMD is doing with Mantle, and Nvidia with PhysX or with Gameworks lately. btw the best use of destro physics ingame is still: [spoiler] Diablo 3 modified havok I think [/spoiler]

^ Find another bait. :P @Denial, And? all is good. I just said physx took long to optimize properly unlike bullet, guess it was too much.. //I wont say anything else. Not worth it. Just this, new physx flex looks good, cant wait for some games using it.:)

^ Find another bait. :P @Denial, And? all is good. I just said physx took long to optimize properly unlike bullet, guess it was too much.. //I wont say anything else. Not worth it. Just this, new physx flex looks good, cant wait for some games using it.:)

https://lh4.googleusercontent.com/-5u5mC3xlRuQ/UxYcuobTXuI/AAAAAAACRIQ/S9vGTrJwsYI/w480-h361/gif-samba.gif

Rage engine is the only worth mentioning, just like U3E by physx

RAGE and Bullet is an interesting story, btw - how much of Bullet was used in RAGE (GTA IV was mentioned as using only parts of it), and how much has left nowadays ? For example, in his 2013 presentation, Coumans yet again puts GTA IV, and not Max Payne 3 or Red Dead Redemption, which were already released.

I once tested Bullet sdk and made a video, now I see its already 4 years old..

And here is 6-years old video of PhysX cloth running in software, and ? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v8LpC0rrUC8 Both are using same approach, called Position Based Dynamics, pioneered by NovodeX, btw. Now, how about a story ? A few years back, a new cloth simulation engine has appeared, called Shroud It was very quick (literally obliterating both PhysX and Bullet in terms of performance), more simplistic, stable and easy to control - in comparison to both PBD cloth solvers, with all the features like softbodies, two-way rigid body collisions, tearing, etc - features, that have turned out to be reduntant and not used by developers. http://www.cloak-works.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/Benchmark.png NVIDIA took the bait and rewrote their cloth engine from scratch, ditching out the previous one. The result was PhysX 3 cloth solver - more simple, but also more effective and faster (even AVX SIMD is used), oriented on character clothing. And APEX Clothing is now in demand - Bioshock Infinite, Risen 3, Warframe, War of the Vikings, Lords of the Fallen, Witcher 3.. Unity 5 and UE4 (you can notice many announced games using it, from Hatred to Tekken 7) integrations. Bullet is left with his monstrous PBD cloth, which will unlikely will be able to compete with Havok Cloth, Shroud or APEX. So, it is a story about who is really late for the party.

^ I just said physx took long to optimize properly unlike bullet

Buut.. benchmark numbers are saying, that PhysX 2.8 was already optimized just as well as Bullet. Such in-depth benchmarks are solid. All the stuff "I think Bullet would run same stuff fine on CPU, but I don't know for sure, cause none of the games with GPU Bullet (or same effects at least) were released" that goes for years - is not.

anyway does it matter?

Truth matters. Also, it is always nice to talk with knowledgeable person 🙂 (amount of sarcasm yet to be defined)

new physx flex looks good, cant wait for some games using it

I must agree on this.

I played quite a few hardware physx 2.8 games and all ran inefficient, Bullet up or down. Personally I would rather play all those hw physx 2 games "the way they were meant to be played" not with stutters, slowdowns and what not. Like I said, good that they finally rewrote the whole thing and yes its very late.