Not at all, Bullet's GPU solver is not yet in release.you should hardware accelerate your physic engine for the GPU, by OpenCL or just by OpenGL shaders( a lot harder though, and more hackish...). That's what makes PhysX and Havoks performance so good.
Corrected that for you. I wish you good luck, you're going to need it.No thanks to the ones who were trying to discourage save me from wasting my time, effort and energy
Not at all, Bullet's GPU solver is not yet in release.
Did i mention Bullets? Even if i am wrong with Havok, since it has limited GPU support, however are going to have full on next-gen consoles.
Hmm, poorly expressed by me. What i mean is that AAA physic engines are moving towards GPU acceleration, which is state of the art. With the next-gen consoles, we would see that CPU based physics engine are being slowly thrown away, in favor of GPU based. Why create a CPU based physic engine, when we are missing a good and open-source GPU based physic engine, that are platform independent. Not that he is going to create a open-source engine, but you see what i mean. The question is what's the goal. Do you want to create an useful engine and push the market, or are you going to create an engine just for education(where parallel programming is a good start though).
You could start with making a physics engine that can deal with forces but not collisions to start with. Basically add the ability to apply forces and torque on objects (eg. apply some force on some point on object) and have them move accordingly. This will already give you something usable, you could for example make collision simply range based and make a small game (some sort of an object avoidance game?)
You might want to look into using an integrator to reduce error at that point.
Then you need to add the collision detection & reaction part. Detection means pretty much finding all the collisions present (this is where you need to do a lot of optimization) and then figuring out how all the forces balance out so your stack of boxes doesnt explode.
No thanks to the ones who were trying to discourage save me from wasting my time, effort and energy
Ok, sorry for taking it that far. I understand what they meant. They were trying to save me from wasting my time, etc.. Which, I thank them for that, but if someone started a thread on it, they probably want to learn how to do it, not to be told that is wasting my time. This is something that I really want to do. So maybe I was wrong, and I apologize for that. This is it fixed
No thanks to the ones who were trying to discourage save me from wasting my time, effort and energy
