| ethomaz said: Anyway the best phisics API in the market is the Havok yet... they tried to create the Havok FX to run on GPU but the project is cancelled for unknown reason. |
Well, maybe this - not really the same thing, but I liked Charlie's thoughts on the matter - though it's totally different topic (why he thinks Xeon Phi will destroy GPGPU market):
"The talent pools that can write decent GPGPU code is both small and shallow, plus the people that can do it well are few and far between. Worse yet, they are expensive, very very expensive, and they know it. The normal GPGPU coding process involves hiring people for way more than you want to spend, then paying them copious amounts to climb a steep and always changing learning curve. The end result usually ends up with mediocre code that more often than not misses the vendor’s promises by an order of magnitude. More often than not, the projects don’t come close to their goals if they don’t outright fail. This is why the software stack is of deadly importance. If a top GPGPU coder makes $150K or so, lets just round up to $200K with benefits, toys, and incentives, that is a lot of money. To develop a code base with a team of ten coders over a year will cost lots and lots of money, usually dwarfing the cost of the hardware. The safe route is to use vanilla x86 servers, coders that are familiar with them, and proven tools to do the job."
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/13/what-will-intel-xeon-phi-do-to-the-gpgpu-market/
Honestly, I would love to see Intel coming back with another Larrabee in high end GPU market - than, it would be quite possible to take things like "we'll run that on GPU" with ease.
