on a other note, if GPU support is the end goal for MOSES team, it should be noted that Bullet also can do GPU support and even multi-threaded cpu support, as it stands right now its only single thread for Bulletsim, though it can be loaded into a separate thread removed from the simulator heartbeat, it should also be noted that very little effort has gone into fully optimizing what Bullet could potentially do in OpenSimulator. I do kind of wonder why the choice to not improve this effort instead of trying to re-invent the wheel so to speak with yet another platform that ultimately is not all that much better than Bullet in the end and potentially not cross platform. I must admit my interest will be very limited if I am required to use MIAB and likely would not do much testing myself if that is the case, also I would have absolutely no interest at all if it turns out to not have cross platform support though I am not sure that is true.
On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 10:42 PM, Michael Emory Cerquoni < [email protected]> wrote: > GPU is not required for PhysX there is a cpu level it can operate at as > well, and while GPu support is good, I would also be surprised if > OpenSimulator could actually fully utilize a GPU before mono would barf > anyway, mono can only handle so much threading and even offloading all of > that processing to the GPU, all that data ultimately has to flow back > through mono / C# / OpenSim HTTP server and I suspect there will be a huge > bottleneck there that would not allow for much more performance than the > CPU itself could handle anyway, there would likely be some improvement > though, the question is does that warrant the inclusion of an expensive GPU > in a server, its going to draw a lot more power, and will not make a lot of > sense in a standard data center style setup with 1U rack servers, expanding > rack size increases costs quite a lot, the question is does that increased > cost benefit performance enough to justify it, the only way to really find > out is to try, I wonder if InWorldz does any GPu offloading for their > implementation of PhysX, i suspect they do not but would be great to know > for sure. > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 5:15 PM, David Saunders <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I know there be allot of grid interested in trying out the new physics >> when offer. >> >> THe only big drawback of people adopting the PhysX is that relies on a >> GPU to do its processing and not sure if you run more then one engine on a >> machine. >> >> I am sure smaller grids and self hosters would love it. >> >> But do correct me, I not looked into PhysX since last year. >> >> On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 4:42 PM, Shaun T. Erickson <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> It would be sad if this were ultimately for Windows only, as that >>> would rule out its use by a large segment of the OpenSim community. >>> >>> -ste >>> >>> On 3/18/15 4:13 PM, Sean M wrote: >>> >>> Mike, >>> >>> Yes, PhysX.net is the targeted wrapper. >>> >>> Cross compatibility would be nice to maintain but is not a required >>> feature for this effort. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Sean Mondesire, Ph.D. >>> MOSES: Virtual World Research Team >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Opensim-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >>> >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Opensim-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev >> >> > > > -- > Michael Emory Cerquoni > -- Michael Emory Cerquoni
_______________________________________________ Opensim-dev mailing list [email protected] http://opensimulator.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/opensim-dev
