Sign in to follow this  
Belkacem

NVIDIA PhysiX VS HAVOK What is The Choice

Recommended Posts

Hello Again I Want To Help Me To Choice One Of Those Engine Physics : 1- HAVOC 2- NVIDIA PHYSICX Can Any One Tell Me What are The Features Of The Two Engine And what Is The Best Engine For Games Creator I Just read Havoc Have More Details for Physix and Havoc Use CPU But Nvidia PhysiX Use GPU The Most Game Used HAVOC And I Do not Understand What I Will Learn so Please Help

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Both libraries are very capable and have similar feature sets. Both offer excellent performance. Both would be a good choice. Both have tools that are built to make it easy for game developers to incorporate the library into the game. I think the GPU support for PhysX is going to be limited for nVIDIA GPU's, so if you were interested in GPU acceleration you would need to consider that limitation. My recommendation, if you are working a large project, would be to spend time to evaluate both libraries. If you are new to physics integration, on a large project I'd try to spend at least a month on each library to learn about physics integration and experiment with the libraries to learn how easy they are to use for your project. If you are working on a hobby project, or a small indie game, I personally would suggest just picking the one that you have a better feeling about. Does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I personally prefer Havok. The interface is much more desireable. Especially related to collision primitives, their containers, asyncronous queries, their examples, the ragdoll package, the documentation, the prestige. The only thing you lose is the GPU acceleration but it comes with a threading package so it shouldn't really matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by bzroom
I personally prefer Havok. The interface is much more desireable. Especially related to collision primitives, their containers, asyncronous queries, their examples, the ragdoll package, the documentation, the prestige. The only thing you lose is the GPU acceleration but it comes with a threading package so it shouldn't really matter.


So, Does that library use multicore processors? Is it easy to activate it?

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Pros for Havok
1) If you use havok you can even sell your game for free as long as its under $10
2) When using havok you dont need to install extra software.
3) The default vechiles are better for Havok (they wont flip over).
4) Havok has a barrel primitive shape, whereas physX doesnt.
5) Default character controller for Havok is slightly better. It has 4 states (climb, fall, walk, jump). It can also handle slow moving platforms.

Pros for PhysX
1) the tutorials are alot better. With Havok everything is dumped into one huge project and it becomes quite time consuming to figure it out.
2) You can use PhysX cloth (whereas you cant use havok cloth without paying for it).

I actually like PhysX better but thats probably because I am more used to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by ricardo_ruiz_lopez
Quote:
Original post by bzroom
I personally prefer Havok. The interface is much more desireable. Especially related to collision primitives, their containers, asyncronous queries, their examples, the ragdoll package, the documentation, the prestige. The only thing you lose is the GPU acceleration but it comes with a threading package so it shouldn't really matter.


So, Does that library use multicore processors? Is it easy to activate it?

Thanks.


Yes, and yes. It's easy to activate, but it requires some planning to actually use. That is to respect the data synchronization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Aiursrage
Pros for Havok
1) If you use havok you can even sell your game for free as long as its under $10


Do you know what the current license terms are for PhysX? For a while (pre-nVIDIA acquisition and maybe afterwards) it was free for commercial use as well as hobby/R&D/open source projects. But, that may have changed. It is unclear from the nVIDIA web pages I've seen. The current EULA (publically available from their developer website) implies there may be a fee for commercial use, but it also reads like fees may be waived if you give them a reciprocal license to use your application to demonstrate and market their technology. If there is any current publically available information about the terms for commercial projects, I'd be interested to know. (Of course, one can always ask nVIDIA directly, but I haven't found nVIDIA to be super quick about answering questions.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I too am intersted in this. For a while the license was very easy to find and very clear. You could sell your pc game for *any* value, if it's over $10 then you have to display the havok logo.

However, i looked for the license details a few months back and was unable to find them. I fear they may have ended that promotional offer.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:

Both libraries are very capable and have similar feature sets. Both offer excellent performance. Both would be a good choice. Both have tools that are built to make it easy for game developers to incorporate the library into the game. I think the GPU support for PhysX is going to be limited for nVIDIA GPU's, so if you were interested in GPU acceleration you would need to consider that limitation. My recommendation, if you are working a large project, would be to spend time to evaluate both libraries. If you are new to physics integration, on a large project I'd try to spend at least a month on each library to learn about physics integration and experiment with the libraries to learn how easy they are to use for your project. If you are working on a hobby project, or a small indie game, I personally would suggest just picking the one that you have a better feeling about. Does that make sense?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by grhodes_at_work
Quote:
Original post by Aiursrage
Pros for Havok
1) If you use havok you can even sell your game for free as long as its under $10


Do you know what the current license terms are for PhysX? For a while (pre-nVIDIA acquisition and maybe afterwards) it was free for commercial use as well as hobby/R&D/open source projects. But, that may have changed. It is unclear from the nVIDIA web pages I've seen. The current EULA (publically available from their developer website) implies there may be a fee for commercial use, but it also reads like fees may be waived if you give them a reciprocal license to use your application to demonstrate and market their technology. If there is any current publically available information about the terms for commercial projects, I'd be interested to know. (Of course, one can always ask nVIDIA directly, but I haven't found nVIDIA to be super quick about answering questions.)




Quote:

If you are building a commercial PC game, regardless of price, you can begin developing your game immediately after downloading from the www.havok.com/tryhavok site. During development, you can evaluate, prototype, and even publicly demonstrate your PC game, subject to general restrictions in the download agreement, with no further involvement from Havok.
Prior to publicly selling your Havok-powered commercial PC game, however, please note:

If you plan to sell your commercial PC Game above a retail value of $10 USD, (or equivalent amount in other currencies based on prevailing exchange rates at the time of launch), you must first request a no-charge PC Game distribution license from Havok at www.havok.com/PCgamedistribution, prior to retail release of your game. This PC Game distribution agreement is required to ensure you have complied with Havok logo, copyright, and attribution requirements, and that your application is a PC game (commercial non-game application distribution is not allowed). There will be no fee associated with this because the license fee has been covered by Intel under a commercial agreement with Havok.


If you plan to sell your commercial PC Game for a retail value of less than or equal to $10 USD, the PC Game distribution license is NOT required from Havok … knock yourself out!


http://www.havok.com/index.php?page=pro

Quote:

NVIDIA PhysX SDK Downloads
NVIDIA PhysX - Game Physics for PC, Console, and Online GamingThis page contains links to the latest NVIDIA PhysX Free Licensed version of the PhysX PC SDK. For information on commercial licenses, source code, and console-game versions of the library, email PhysX Developer Support.

NOTE: Before installing the SDK, you must install the latest PhysX System Software.

http://developer.nvidia.com/object/physx_downloads.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
thank you

but i have some Comment :

Quote:
Original post by Promit
And as a side note, in English we only capitalize the first letter of a sentence, as well as words that are names. Don't use a capital for every word.


Ok , i' ll use your advice , thanks !!!!!!!!!



Quote:
Original post by grhodes_at_work
Both libraries are very capable and have similar feature sets. Both offer excellent performance. Both would be a good choice. Both have tools that are built to make it easy for game developers to incorporate the library into the game. I think the GPU support for PhysX is going to be limited for nVIDIA GPU's, so if you were interested in GPU acceleration you would need to consider that limitation. My recommendation, if you are working a large project, would be to spend time to evaluate both libraries. If you are new to physics integration, on a large project I'd try to spend at least a month on each library to learn about physics integration and experiment with the libraries to learn how easy they are to use for your project. If you are working on a hobby project, or a small indie game, I personally would suggest just picking the one that you have a better feeling about. Does that make sense?



So i can use the both libraries , wow , if i use the both libraries
does it work ?
look lets take example :

lets create a box using physX class ( NxBoxShape , NxBoxShapeDesc , ect ... )
and i want to use havoc to destroy the box


does it work with no problems at all .

does this scene will

Calculated in GPU or CPU because physX use GPU a havoc use CPU


if the Calculated doing in CPU the game will be slow
Special where are a complex scene .


Quote:
Original post by bzroom
The only thing you lose is the GPU acceleration


I don't want lose the GPU acceleration because the game will be slow
special if they are lot of Calculations


Quote:
Original post by Aiursrage
5) Default character controller for Havok is slightly better. It has 4 states (climb, fall, walk, jump). It can also handle slow moving platforms.


Can you explane this topic .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote:
Original post by Belkacem
So i can use the both libraries , wow , if i use the both libraries
does it work ?
look lets take example :

lets create a box using physX class ( NxBoxShape , NxBoxShapeDesc , ect ... )
and i want to use havoc to destroy the box


does it work with no problems at all .


No, you completely misunderstood his point. He was saying that you should experiment with each library independently in order to find out which one words the best for you.


Quote:
Original post by Belkacem
if the Calculated doing in CPU the game will be slow
Special where are a complex scene .

I don't want lose the GPU acceleration because the game will be slow
special if they are lot of Calculations


It really comes down to how intelligently you make your collision primitives and how you partition the environment. Remeber, people have been making crazy games on all kinds of hardware for a long time. GPU process is NOT required.

Quote:
Original post by Aiursrage
5) Default character controller for Havok is slightly better. It has 4 states (climb, fall, walk, jump). It can also handle slow moving platforms.


Can you explane this topic .[/quote]

The two packages (havok and physx) offer a physics actor designed for controlling characters in your game. The havok one is very nice and very user friendly. It allows you to tag other havok objects as "ladder." When the player approaches the ladder, havok will handle his translation up the ladder. I have to agree the havok character controller is very nice, though i've never used the physx one. Also the havok character controller has two or 3 modes. Depending on the quality and efficiency you desire from the character simulation. I believe physx only uses the same method as havok's low quality / high efficiency controller (rigid body character).

My opinion is that you should choose ANY physics engine. Which ever one you can get your hands on the easiest, and just play around with it. The basic concepts will translate well between the libraries. So it really doesnt matter until you have a deep understanding of what's going on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this