Multi-core physics

Any hope for multi-core support for the physics engine? Seems such a waste to have to minimize physics in a game because Unity maxes out one core while the others idle helplessly.

 

To add on the maxing out: any hope that the buggy cpu affinity code in Unity finally gets removed. Reported it already with 2.1 and even 3.1 still hard locks itself against cpu 0 until you forcefully remove the processes right to use it through the process manager processor affinity dialog

 

As there is a native osX PhysX library now...

 

That doesn't change anything, its now officially out yeah but Unity already used native osx physx library before. The library is likely the same and just as not GPU accelerated as always
Its not like the library hinders unity to use multithreading physx, its unity that does not use it / forcefully prevent it from doing it.

 

Does Unity take advantage of the GPU at all? My dev machine has an nVidia graphics board that supposedly includes physics acceleration, but when I watch the CPU load it definitely maxes out that single CPU when physics processes are involved. Thus leading me to suspect that Unity doesn't use the GPU for anything but graphics.

 

No it does not take advantage.
Thats not possible, to take advantage they can't use the source based one, they would need to use the precompiled one.

And even then its only gpu accelerated on windows on NVIDIA GeForce 8300 and newer with CUDA enabled drivers installed and CUDA enabled

 

My principal concern is Windows so I would be happy if only Windows builds supported it, but I'm probably in the minority here in that opinion.

 

pretty surely, yes.
Also, principal concern windows: what does it help if 70% of the users+ won't get hw acceleration?
Multithreading is 10 folds more important and would be more than enough for the features we have from physx

 

On "certain" projects I might be able to specify that the game will only run "well" if a PhysX GPU is used. Not likely UT would go that route, but I'm desperate to get better physics performance.

True and thus more likely the way UT might go.

 

Think so too.
Also multithread will happen, its not a matter of if, but when. Cause otherwise UT will never enable developers to release a single disk game for PS3 or XBox 360 as neither of them will accept an engine thats unable to use 70% of the hardware due to a fundamental flaw by any halfway current middleware base requirement

 

Added this to Unity Feedback, your vote is appreciated!
http://feedback.unity3d.com/forums/15792-unity/suggestions/1604769-multi-core-multi-thread-physics

 

How can Unity currently market itself as PS3 or 360 compatible if it DOESN'T use all the cores?

Isn't that misleading?

 

Have spent my max 3 votes on the wishlist post.
@sawfish... keep poking. You'll find literally dozens of major features misleadingly represented in this manner. It's "the Unity way".

 

I would assume along the development for exactly that platforms UT is working on this shortcoming (for these and for the dual core mobiles where not having it is a major problem as the mobile cpus don't get faster but more parallel in 2011) and I've good hope that it will lead to solving it on other platforms too.

 

I disagree, and if this is the way you feel, why use the engine?

 

Actually you don't need cuda for gpu accelerated physx. Just the physx driver.

 

True, but have you tried running physx on a card without cuda, let me tell you how funny it is... ALOT.

PS: I agree with this request!