[ODE] Tokamak and Netwon Game Dynamics

[gl]

Found this on the Newton forum
(http://www.physicsengine.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=139):

"Newton solver may not be as fast as others engines that have an iterative
linear time solver but trade acuracy for speed. This does not means that
Newton is slow. newton is fast enought to simulate several hundred rigid
bodies colliding with a arbitrarilly complex terrain in realtime, or stacks
of 30 to 40 bodies, no just simple stacks but arbitrary configutations.
Newton solver goes for acuracy rather than speed. The statistic order of the
newton solver is best case linear O(N), worst case quadratic O(N*N). on
average you get 0(N * log(N)). Where N is the number of restrited DOF. "

What I liked playing with one of the demos was that there seemed to be zero
visual interpenetration or spongieness - everything is totally rigid yet
stable.

Of course it's not open source, which is a major downside.  I'm also
wondering if they aren't planning to charge for the SDK once it's complete.
--
gl




----- Original Message ----- 
From: "George Birbilis" <birbilis at kagi.com>
To: "luca regini" <l.regini at diesgroup.com>; <ode at q12.org>
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 7:08 PM
Subject: Re: [ODE] Tokamak and Netwon Game Dynamics


> also see the newly released Novodex Physics SDK
> http://www.novodex.com/
> they have some interesting demos, running very fast!
>
> the truck in city demo is quite bad though
>
> seems both Unreal and MilkShape3D will include this engine in their future
> versions
>
> -----
> George Birbilis (birbilis at kagi.com)
> http://www.kagi.com/birbilis
> --------------
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "luca regini" <l.regini at diesgroup.com>
> To: <ode at q12.org>
> Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 4:33 PM
> Subject: [ODE] Tokamak and Netwon Game Dynamics
>
>
> > Lately i have seen that two new products are joining the market in
physic
> > engines: tokamak and "newton game dynamics".
> > I have seen that both of them claim to be better than ode in some way or
> > other, so i am posting here some questions.
> >
> > Newton claims that:
> > "Our engine implements a deterministic solver, which is not based on
> > traditional LCP or iterative methods, but possesses the stability and
> speed
> > of both respectively"
> >
> > while Tokamak claims:
> > "TOKAMAK definitely has much faster joint solving + c++ interface +
solved
> > problem with primitive vs.. triangle collision + solid objects +
breaking
> of
> > objects + object sleeping "
> >
> > To my knowledge ODE architecture follows the current state of the art in
> > analytical physic engines.
> >
> > I wonder how could it be that tokamak has a faster joint solving engine
(
> > besides hardcore optimization), shouldn't it be an LCP solver anyway?
> >
> > And regarding Newton, LCP iterative solvers are of linear complexity and
> so
> > they are damn quick. I haven't heard of any deterministic solver that
can
> > rivals LCP iterative methods.
> >
> > Anyone has some clues?
> >
> > Greets,
> > Luca
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ODE mailing list
> > ODE at q12.org
> > http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> ODE mailing list
> ODE at q12.org
> http://q12.org/mailman/listinfo/ode