emekapa
Yes … i´m from brazil. But how? My english is not so grokk as i think … oh boy 
See ya
Get the biased replies from the other communities. Hilarity ensues. 
ogre3d.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=53966
irrlicht.sourceforge.net/phpBB2/ … hp?t=36163
Hehe, lol.
Wait, he used lowercase to write PANDA! How dare he!!
Btw, Panda uses about 100 mb. Thats alot…
texugo: that’s easy … sou portugues e pelo nick… 
rdb: yeah i know, i’ve told in this thread that i’ve put in the 3 foruns and this was the one with more and better responses
ThomasEgi: Thanks for the clarification
qwaqwaqawaqwaa 
These ogre guys are mess … 
emekapa : putz … se fosse uma cobra já tinha me mordido … esqueci que meu nick está em português 
. Abraços … precisando é só escrever.
It’s rare these kinds of threads offer anything substantial, but here is my 2 cents…
It depends on what I want.
Do I want end-to-end game engine with everything from sound to physics to multi-file management? Panda3d, by far.
Do I want a drop-in graphics engine with extra goodies like physics? Ogre would make a lot more sense. (And in fact, I am using it for one of my projects, where I replace my own 2D graphics with Ogre’s.)
Irrlicht I have no experience with. From what I gather it’s somewhere between Ogre and Panda3d, a graphics engine with a lot of built-in extras right out of the box.
I’m not going to comment on the communities for the other projects, because I have no direct experience. All I can say for sure is that Panda3d has a very active and knowledgeable community, and I’ve seen it as universally helpful and friendly. The only down-side I can say about it is that you tend to get ignored if you don’t communicate in a very clear manner – But we’re supposed to be programmers and artists using a professional 3d engine. I wouldn’t expect people to take time from their own busy day if I didn’t make the effort to write a thorough, concise forum post. The “how do I make an MMO in panda in a week when I’ve never written any code before?” posts tend to fall to the bottom of the forum stack quickly.
I was mostly drawn to Panda3d because I am a Python geek. But I am glad to see that people are using Panda3d purely in C++ situations without much issue.
Beginner here.
Well all I can say having tried all the engine, being on a mac.
Irrlicht:
For a c++ engine, all I wanted was straight text editor + compiler. It was an epic fail. I even read some french (my language) tutorial, I never went that much frustrated at programming something. And don’t get me started on where c++ ends and where cocoa/carbon starts. Point is, I just hate an IDE.
OGRE:
Compiled okay, big shiny demo and stuff… but for what I see with the fact that Torchlight used it, I feel like it is more some kind of perfect way for some dev to reach the graphical perfection for any sort of project. But since awesome graphics needs the same quantity of epic knowledge of the nvidia magics of shaders language and other method to make us all epileptic, and since all I wanted was a flat ground with some walls and a character (animated or not) move on it, I skipped this engine.
Panda3d:
- python is god’s gift for a programmer.
- mac supported, no difference with other platforms (what a relief)
- all samples work out of the box and can be tweaked to see what it does change
- tasks look like a big simplification of how a real time 3d engine works, and that is not the least of the headache in a game, just a wild guess.
I’m still quite in the blur and laziness on how to start what I want to do with panda3d, but at least I know it is doable, not some “engine” that made me want to learn the basics of opengl rather than use a software that contradict another equivalent engine by its complexity, design and easiness.
/me votes panda3d for the win.
I don’t think panda’s performance can be better than ogre, anyway it is C++ with python wrapper/objects. If a demo program written in ogre purely C/C++, it’s performance shall be better in general.
There is a demo program “Ocean 2 Cubemap only” which is much faster than “Ocean 2 from Ogre”. It is because I put a lot of debug code in the second example when I did the port.
Performance on my machine is:
Demomaster => Ocean 2 from Ogre = 64fps
Demomaster => Ocean 2 Cubemap only = 100fps
Ogre Ocean 2 demo => 150fps
Ogre Ocean 2 demo, using a debug compilation => 64fps
Consider the complexity to write in ogre, it is worth a lot to use panda.
Edit: nvm, I misunderstood something
What exactly do you mean by rigid pre-fab architecture? Ogre is very flexible about the architecture of your program.
Obviously all three forums are biased, and all three think they are the only right one. It would be like going to the ati and nvidia forums and asking which graphics card is better. Both will say theirs is the best choice.
Serious discussions on engine comparison rarely work out well when they take place on one of the engine’s forums. A neutral place like gamedev.net is probably better, although at least this way none of us are flooded with “use unity3d instead!”. 
Well, I also wrote ogre in lower case, and left the 3D off the end of both, so I was equally insulting them I guess.
Hey welcome to the forums!
Not all members from all of the forums are biased. Rdb said
which doesnt mean all the replies posted.
You can’t be serious…
ogres
I’ve spent the last hours doing a common interface to Irrlicht and Panda3D in order to run exactly the same scenes and run some benchmarks, since OP asked me about it. Now, the first one I did is a little silly, just a thousand static balls in a scene, textured, with trilinear filtering; but I’m tired so I’ll post this for now. I didn’t include Ogre3D because it’s a little more complicated to setup and my goal for today was just comparing Panda to one of the specialized engines, I’m pretty sure Irrlicht is approximately as fast as Ogre, and all I wanted to see was how would Panda3D perform at rendering since it does many more things. I plan to include Ogre it in the future, though.
Check the FPS and API’s used in the window titles. (Irrlicht reports the FPS as an integer, I’m not rounding.)
The OpenGL results are surprising, but this is Windows, and the drivers are pretty bad, so it could mean anything. The DX results are much more like what I expected. For such a static scene I didn’t feel the need to extract an average over time, the FPS don’t vary at all. Also, the texturing is slightly different even though I’m specifying trilinear filtering in both engines, but that kind of differences are to be expected. Panda3D is rendering more balls than Irrlicht, because the aspect ratio handling code is also slightly different in both engines, so take that into account too, I’ll try to adjust the fov better next time. All in all, I wouldn’t recommend taking a decision based on these results, but I think it’s good enough to conclude that Panda3D isn’t bloated by all of its features (which is what I wanted to check). Consider that even though Disney does very low tech games for kids, these games still have to run in really crappy integrated VGAs, so it makes sense that it’s highly optimized in despite of the low technical profile.
System: Nvidia 8600GT/Q6600/Windows 7
I’ll share this common interface after I add Ogre3D to it, so that people can do new benchmarks.
Of course everyone is biased, that’s why it makes little sense to ask which engine is better here. I just found it funny that on the Ogre3D forums, most people are somewhat more biased and a less serious than here (they just shout ‘ogre’ without arguments to support that), where you get serious replies from people that have tried other engines.
But what am I doing? Sorry for the offtopic post
Well, we’ve had so many threads about ogre vs irrlicht, and none of them ever have a useful result except that whichever engine forum you ask on says to use theirs, so it’s hard to keep serious.
True, I didn’t mean to imply that no one here (or on the other 2 forums) can give unbiased responses. It’s just forums as a whole that tend to favour their own product.
I did put on the end.
I’m almost never serious.
Hmm, I didn’t notice an over abundance of Pandas on here.
We once had a person from an ogre/orc fansite hang around trying to start conversations about how cool orcs and similar things were, until eventually they realised it was just the name and mascot mesh, none of us really wanted to pretend we were ogres.
Ok, sorry, going a bit off topic now.
You all right kojak. Lemme a better explain.
Ogre has a (good) architecture. But your game/graphic project must be placed inside it. When you planning your product you must planning inside this rationallity. Sometimes this is good, sometimes this is bad.
If you got a great project, this is good. But if you got a little one, this is not so good at all. Besides high customization of ogre system is not so simple alter the managers behaviors if you need.
Compare the work you have to make Robot Boxing in PANDA and the same work in OGRE (or PYOGRE). What’s the diference?
In OGRE you got a lot of things to do. Initialize managers, resources, compositions, Listeners, etc. In PANDA just put the robots, define events and run! The keyword is flexibility!
PANDA’s architecture is the most flexible i’ve ever seem. You planning your project as you like and PANDA connect with your project … not my project must connect with PANDA. No matter your programming style, your planning style and if are a great project or home brew project. If you’re master in design patterns or not.
PANDA changes for you. You must change to OGRE. This is my point of view and experience with theses systems.
Off course please … the fact i dislike OGRE’s architecture doesn’t mean OGRE is worst. People must choose what they feel better. I choose PANDA … if someone choose OGRE or IRRLICHT … well … the world is a great place i said
Regards
My reason for using panda instead of orge, irrlicht, crystalspace, … is that for me installing and starting right away did only work with panda and only for panda i found some usable python-tutorial (was some time ago - so maybe things changed).
There are other important aspects of course - but being able to start without knowing much was most important to me.
Haha, that’s funny. Takes all kinds, eh?
I’ve personally never noticed panda fanatics on here; Heck nobody has even mentioned ever trying to save the pandas as far as I can recall.
Gogg, good work, though I don’t think it’s going to really show much of a difference. Unless Ogre/Irrlicht/Panda3d does something really stupid when building/culling a list of renderable geometry (such as not using vertex buffers or failing to batch primitives), they should give about the same results on the same hardware – you’re going to be more limited by how fast the card can accept triangles than anything.
I never approached what engine I wanted to use based on speed; I felt they were all equivalent. I was more concerned about ease of use, and ease of asset import. I also wanted an engine based on modern 3D graphics ideas, and not have to screw around with things like BSP-based collision detection or hacked-on shader support. (I use Torque, and while the engine itself it’s great, it’s filled with a bunch of incredibly arcane rendering code, straight from the Voodoo1 days.)
You are right, but that was exactly my intention, making sure that nothing weird is going on inside Panda. And maybe you didn’t notice but there’s a noticeable difference in OpenGL, though. So maybe it’s not that silly after all. Sure, the OpenGL drivers on Windows suck, but the fact still remains that one scores double than the other on what is a pretty standard card with the drivers that everybody is going to have installed.
Gogg many many thanks for you patience! I would like to see an head to head with ogre but i understand that it gives so many work! 
You guys have been a light, i’ve already eliminated irrlicht, now i just have to decide between ogre and panda and the performance will make the diference! Thank you all
I see this all the time; OpenGL under Windows, as you said, is pretty goofy with all the driver issues. A different set of client states will result in wildly different kinds of OGL performance. That 70-ish FPS is suspiciously like a multiple of the 30-ish FPS – maybe it’s ignoring vertical retrace or triple/double buffering client state requests.
I wouldn’t necessarily claim it’s Panda3d being wildly more efficient in OGL than Irrlicht, especially since the DX3D tests are more even.