About the Y=2X relationship, I don’t think that’s relevant, because that would imply that geometry calculations are taking near to 0 time and I bet it’s taking a good chunk of the loop iteration time. However, you get a point that something is probably buggy, but, isn’t avoiding that kind of stuff part of being more efficient? Any engine’s code is full of workarounds for buggy cards/setups.
Correct, but I don’t agree that you should correlate the apis of each engine like that. Most of the inefficiency could be found in the renderers.
What it means, IMHO, is that either Irrlicht is doing something wrong at OpenGL or Panda is doing something wrong at D3D.
I tried all 3 of these engines - plus a couple of commercial other ones quite a few years ago. After my Java/C(++) Classes with good grades I ended up using Panda3D - learning Python. Why should I follow a fixed style on how to set up my program? Why should I twist my mind the way the devs want? Its the mind blowing simplicity that Panda3D and Python provide that convinced me in the end.
-> I wrote a simple chatserver (telnet-style) in “pure” C(++)-Code which took me a week (as first “bigger” project) and was/were good 3 pages of code that you need to scroll to the right for another page because of code complexity and usage of proper formatting (which I wanted to have). I was a bit disappointed that such a small task (binding to a socket, validating input/output, mirroring the input to the connected clients) created such intense headaches. - I stopped programming for quite some time. - Then I stumbled upon Panda3D and heard the first time of Python. I did some basic tutorials and wanted to write the same chat server again. And thats what I did. Results were a far more clean (readable) code in ~1.5 pages of code (in both cases the “tiny”-texteditor on a classic non-X linux screen).
Thats why I would tend to use Panda3D. Its awesome for Python’ers.
But of course we are all biased. We wouldn’t answer HERE if we weren’t no Panda3D-fans.
In fact Panda3D dis attract me because of its simplicity. In just 1-2h of work, while learning a new language, I was able to get a small but clean and satisfying result. And everything I see, find or read for now tell me I’ll be able to expand it easily into the larger and more structured code I need…
In many other engines I tested, I never got this far because of all the stuff that had to be setup before you render your first mesh. That was what originally attracted me in TV3D for my first stellar system editor project, and believe me, Panda3D is even simpler and Python is a breeze !
Maybe it has drawbacks on other areas. But for what I want to do, it is a fine resource…
Have anyone managed to finish the tests like goggs did? Or someone have done tests between ogre and panda 3D to make a comparison in terms of results ? It would help me a lot : )
