Simulation processes often compete with physical processes for engineering and manufacturing applications. If a user can design, build, and test faster and cheaper than they can simulate, the simulation process will lose. As a result, simulation engineers and simulation software developers are always trying to make the simulation process easier and faster. Engineering departments across the globe are challenged to stay on top of leading technologies and to understand how each technology can help their own processes. GPU-based software is one promising technology field with potential to help tip the scales permanently towards virtual simulation processes, and no solver class is more mature in its GPU adoption than game engine physics solvers. GPUs are changing the industry, and software built to take advantage of GPUs is leaving CPU based software behind. Game engine physics solvers use GPUs to provide simulation results instantly, and have been doing so for years, but are those simulation results up to engineering standards? Can a game engine physics solver stand up to the accuracy of traditional finite element codes? Can engineers trust game engine physics solvers? There is a lot of justified skepticism that requires an experienced engineering research team to address. We used our 30+ years of experience in engineering best practices, finite element solver usage of all the major commercial packages, and simulation validation to put game engine physics solvers to the test. We tested Unreal, Unity, Blender, and Omniverse for their simulation accuracy and usability. Our goal was to answer one simple question – is there a place for these tools in engineering work flows right now? And secondarily, is there hope for expanded usage in the future? Come listen in and join the discussion as we share our research and our conclusions about game engine physics solvers and their role in engineering processes and digital twin development.