Irrlicht Vs. Ogre - Aftershock
-
- Gnoblar
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:07 pm
Irrlicht Vs. Ogre - Aftershock
Hi all!
I think that:
+ Ogre Mesh Format File
+ Huge community
+ Very Fast DirectX Render
+ Good Shadres standard iplementation in Engin
+ Good Animation System
+ Very Good Shadows System
+ Used in some Commercial Project
+ Big framework addons (eg. LUA binding)
+/- FrameListner system (only programming in classes)
+/- Good Tutorial but Based on extanded header file (~ApplicationDemo)
- In real support only Windows
- Very slow OpenGL Render
- Radeon + OpenGL + Windows = Very slow!
- Radeon + OpenGL + Linux = Very Very Very slow!!!
So Ogre is very good engine for Windows platform. Ogre + IrrKlang/OpenAL + Bullet/Newton/ODE = Very Good "Team" for create Commercial Games
I use Irrlicht, so I can write more info about Irr than about Ogre
+ Fast DirectX Render (~5% slower than Ogre in Mode "Only Mesh + Texture + Animation"
+ Easy adding extension "Eg. Multi Lighting per pixel 8+, Post-Process etc. per Shaders of course "
+ Very good structure (OO programming or Structural - easy write apps in both styles)
+ Very Fast OpenGL!!! (I tested two engines on standard Ogre bsp map. In Ogre I have only 15 FPS in OGL (90 in DX9!!!), but In Irrlicht 65 FPS! in OGL (85 in DX9) on Radeon 9550!!!
+ Total (DX + OGL) very faster than Ogre!
+ Very good for Multi platform!
+ Excellent tutorials
+ Big community
+ Good Extension Irrklang (Irrlicht is not Game Engine!)
+ Good GUI system
+ Big bindings (Python, Lua, Java, NET. etc)
+ SDL mode!
- Without Shaders in standard implementation
- Without Multi Pass in standard implementation
- Bugs in slow shadow system
So Irrlicht is very good engine for cross platform. IrrLicht + Extension shaders + IrrKlang/OpenAL + Bullet/Newton/ODE = Against Very Good "Team" for create Commercial Games
Irrlicht and Ogre are the best free graphic engine in current time! Choice is only for users!
I think that:
+ Ogre Mesh Format File
+ Huge community
+ Very Fast DirectX Render
+ Good Shadres standard iplementation in Engin
+ Good Animation System
+ Very Good Shadows System
+ Used in some Commercial Project
+ Big framework addons (eg. LUA binding)
+/- FrameListner system (only programming in classes)
+/- Good Tutorial but Based on extanded header file (~ApplicationDemo)
- In real support only Windows
- Very slow OpenGL Render
- Radeon + OpenGL + Windows = Very slow!
- Radeon + OpenGL + Linux = Very Very Very slow!!!
So Ogre is very good engine for Windows platform. Ogre + IrrKlang/OpenAL + Bullet/Newton/ODE = Very Good "Team" for create Commercial Games
I use Irrlicht, so I can write more info about Irr than about Ogre
+ Fast DirectX Render (~5% slower than Ogre in Mode "Only Mesh + Texture + Animation"
+ Easy adding extension "Eg. Multi Lighting per pixel 8+, Post-Process etc. per Shaders of course "
+ Very good structure (OO programming or Structural - easy write apps in both styles)
+ Very Fast OpenGL!!! (I tested two engines on standard Ogre bsp map. In Ogre I have only 15 FPS in OGL (90 in DX9!!!), but In Irrlicht 65 FPS! in OGL (85 in DX9) on Radeon 9550!!!
+ Total (DX + OGL) very faster than Ogre!
+ Very good for Multi platform!
+ Excellent tutorials
+ Big community
+ Good Extension Irrklang (Irrlicht is not Game Engine!)
+ Good GUI system
+ Big bindings (Python, Lua, Java, NET. etc)
+ SDL mode!
- Without Shaders in standard implementation
- Without Multi Pass in standard implementation
- Bugs in slow shadow system
So Irrlicht is very good engine for cross platform. IrrLicht + Extension shaders + IrrKlang/OpenAL + Bullet/Newton/ODE = Against Very Good "Team" for create Commercial Games
Irrlicht and Ogre are the best free graphic engine in current time! Choice is only for users!
- betajaen
- OGRE Moderator
- Posts: 3447
- Joined: Mon Jul 18, 2005 4:15 pm
- Location: Wales, UK
- x 58
- Contact:
- sinbad
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 19269
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:19 pm
- Location: Guernsey, Channel Islands
- x 66
- Contact:
To counter the GL claims, Ogre tends to be slower in GL on cards which have bad Vertex Buffer Object (VBO) support. Irrlicht doesn't use VBOs which is why it gets away with it on old tech / drivers. The BSP demo is probably the worst one you could have picked too, since it uses 32-bit indexes which many old cards don't like very much. We haven't bothered optimising our BSP implementation because it is largely abandoned and may well be removed in a future version, because BSP is horribly outdated as a format.
GL on a 6800 and X1600 (that I have) is only about 1-2% slower than the Dx9 version, and that's mostly because GL doesn't do buffer access as well as Dx9, something Long Peaks should finally address.
GL on a 6800 and X1600 (that I have) is only about 1-2% slower than the Dx9 version, and that's mostly because GL doesn't do buffer access as well as Dx9, something Long Peaks should finally address.
- Chris Jones
- Lich
- Posts: 1742
- Joined: Tue Apr 05, 2005 1:11 pm
- Location: Gosport, South England
- x 1
- Evak
- Orc Shaman
- Posts: 707
- Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:51 pm
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- x 1
- Contact:
I thought Ogre and irrlicht had the same gui system.
I tried Illrlicht and from an artists perspective thought it was pretty rubbish. Without a unified proprietary format, and no decent exporters it was a pain to use even from 3ds max. It was the lack of material support above all else.
you basicly have .b3d for irrlicht which is Blitz Basic 3d's propriatery format with a handfull of blend modes and 2 UV channels. And thats about it. And even then its not yet feature complete.
Otherwise you have ancient formats like .3DS which were never designed for realtime 3D and are extremely limiting.
Irrlicht actually has Ogre .mesh support, but nothing in the way of materials.
BSP is old and mostly useless for visuals, but still usefull for hidden underlying structure and doing quick calculations, but its not missed at all here.
I originaly used Ogre because of Ofusion, the one thing it really lacks outside of Ofusion is a decent scene format. But Ofusion caters for everything amazingly if your a 3dsmax user, has a scene loader and if your a pro user like me a ofusion serializer saving library too. Fantastic if you want to make your own level editing tools that save complex scenes as well as load them
Irrlicht seemed rather amaturish in comparrison, with what seemed like little planning and almost non existent consideration for the art pipeline which if a huge negative for what was developed to be a render engine.
Doing anything interesting is a battle and a chore, whilst Ogre with ofusion is fun.
I would give irrlicht a 2/10 from an artist perspective.
Ogre gets an 8/10 the biggest hurdle artists have with Ogre is shaders, since no tools support ogres implementation of shaders, and most artist friendly tools export .FX which need a fair ammount of code modification to get working in ogre. Something thats beyond the majority of artists coding ability.
If irrlicht was developed taking the pipeline into consideration then the scores would soon improve, but at the moment its a floundering and not in the least bit attractive for serious use.
I tried Illrlicht and from an artists perspective thought it was pretty rubbish. Without a unified proprietary format, and no decent exporters it was a pain to use even from 3ds max. It was the lack of material support above all else.
you basicly have .b3d for irrlicht which is Blitz Basic 3d's propriatery format with a handfull of blend modes and 2 UV channels. And thats about it. And even then its not yet feature complete.
Otherwise you have ancient formats like .3DS which were never designed for realtime 3D and are extremely limiting.
Irrlicht actually has Ogre .mesh support, but nothing in the way of materials.
BSP is old and mostly useless for visuals, but still usefull for hidden underlying structure and doing quick calculations, but its not missed at all here.
I originaly used Ogre because of Ofusion, the one thing it really lacks outside of Ofusion is a decent scene format. But Ofusion caters for everything amazingly if your a 3dsmax user, has a scene loader and if your a pro user like me a ofusion serializer saving library too. Fantastic if you want to make your own level editing tools that save complex scenes as well as load them
Irrlicht seemed rather amaturish in comparrison, with what seemed like little planning and almost non existent consideration for the art pipeline which if a huge negative for what was developed to be a render engine.
Doing anything interesting is a battle and a chore, whilst Ogre with ofusion is fun.
I would give irrlicht a 2/10 from an artist perspective.
Ogre gets an 8/10 the biggest hurdle artists have with Ogre is shaders, since no tools support ogres implementation of shaders, and most artist friendly tools export .FX which need a fair ammount of code modification to get working in ogre. Something thats beyond the majority of artists coding ability.
If irrlicht was developed taking the pipeline into consideration then the scores would soon improve, but at the moment its a floundering and not in the least bit attractive for serious use.
Last edited by Evak on Wed Jul 04, 2007 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Praetor
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 3335
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:26 pm
- Location: Rochester, New York, US
- x 3
- Contact:
I am quite confused about the very slow and very very slow opengl comment. Running well on Dx and OGL is important to us. Does sinbad's comments cover it, or is there more to it? When you say very very slow do you mean 1-5% slower, or more?
Game Development, Engine Development, Porting
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
- Evak
- Orc Shaman
- Posts: 707
- Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:51 pm
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- x 1
- Contact:
-
- Gnoblar
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:07 pm
Of course Ogre situation with one, but very good mesh file format is better than Irrlicht multi format, but B3D and X, are good format:) VBO support... In 1.4 will be add for Irrlicht, so We can tested if this version will be released:) I think, than Irrlicht will be faster in OGL mode on Radeon (I haven't GeForce so I can't tested both engines on nVidia device, but I can tested this demo on Radeon 9550, X1100 and X1950PRO. After release 1.4 I put score from test without BSP) very very very slow = ~5% FPS if use RADEON, nVidia has better support in XWindow.
- JohnJ
- OGRE Expert User
- Posts: 975
- Joined: Thu Aug 04, 2005 4:14 am
- Location: Santa Clara, California
- x 4
Remember that Ogre's FrameListener system is 100% optional - it's not uncommon to write your own main loop, which calls Root::getSingleton().renderOneFrame() to render everything. I use this method, and it works very well.+/- FrameListner system (only programming in classes)
I only use FrameListener's when absolutely necessary (and they do come in handy when you need per-frame updates of an isolated subsystem).
-
- Halfling
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Thu Mar 23, 2006 4:14 pm
- Location: Vienna
Didn't know gl is suposed to be only 1-5% slower than dx in windows. Im using dagon and gl is about 30% slower than directx for me. What could be the issue?
Im using:
- Ogre 1.2.3 or 1.2.5, im not sure.
- Windows XP
- GeForce 7950GT
- AMD Athlon X2 64
- Some kind of ForceWare Driver. I don't get the nvidia drivers, i have no clue where to look for the driver name and version.
Im using:
- Ogre 1.2.3 or 1.2.5, im not sure.
- Windows XP
- GeForce 7950GT
- AMD Athlon X2 64
- Some kind of ForceWare Driver. I don't get the nvidia drivers, i have no clue where to look for the driver name and version.
-
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 2903
- Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2007 2:48 pm
- x 58
- Contact:
I've tested and used OpenGL with OGRE both on Windows and Linux, and except the few rendering bugs that sinbad fixed recently I've encountered no trouble whatsoever. Yes, OGL is a few frames off of D3D, but it's really nowhere near mission critical or anything (neither with nvidia nor with ATI cards as far as I could test). Linux runs just fine as well, no performance problems at all. (Although, ATI drivers for Linux are notoriously lacking in performance, features and stability in comparison to nvidia, but that's certainly not OGRE's fault )
- sinbad
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 19269
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:19 pm
- Location: Guernsey, Channel Islands
- x 66
- Contact:
Buffer objects are just slower in several usage modes in GL than Dx9, until Long Peaks, it's a fact of life. Read more about it here: http://www.stevestreeting.com/?p=555Nudel wrote:Didn't know gl is suposed to be only 1-5% slower than dx in windows. Im using dagon and gl is about 30% slower than directx for me. What could be the issue?
Im using:
- Ogre 1.2.3 or 1.2.5, im not sure.
- Windows XP
- GeForce 7950GT
- AMD Athlon X2 64
- Some kind of ForceWare Driver. I don't get the nvidia drivers, i have no clue where to look for the driver name and version.
But you should upgrade. We added some heuristic-based optimisations to VBO usage in the 1.4 branch to bypass some of the GL problems which make GL much closer to Dx9. There was a much larger difference in 1.2.x. It will probably never get there 100% until Long Peaks or beyond but it's better.
- Praetor
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 3335
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:26 pm
- Location: Rochester, New York, US
- x 3
- Contact:
It might be that I haven't used older hardware in a while. I'm using an x1900XT and a 7800. GL runs very fast.
Game Development, Engine Development, Porting
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
- sinbad
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 19269
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:19 pm
- Location: Guernsey, Channel Islands
- x 66
- Contact:
It doesn't help that ATI's GL support has regularly been shite, and they stopped updating drivers for older cards. Then I get people whining that Quake3 runs fine on their 9200 and therefore so should OGRE, despite the fact that Quake3 used only a few specific GL extensions which manufacturers then went on to make sure they impemented. Stuff that came later, including VBOs, got ignored for ages.
We added VBO support in 2004 and we were regularly bitten in the arse because no game was using them. Even Doom3 didn't use VBOs fully. ATI only cared about DirectX for ages and with no new iD engine pushing it forward, GL has stagnated horribly, particularly in driver support. Only nVidia really implemented it properly. Result - when you're trying to use all these new 'recommended' feature sets and 'best practice' paradigms for modern cards across both platforms, poor GL support continually comes up and pisses on your chips. And then people have a go at you and say 'Engine X supports GL better!' even though the actual reason is that Engine X uses GL standards from 5 years ago when iD were still championing GL and thus the hardware & drivers are actually ok with that. Anyone trying to push forward is fighting a land war in Asia. This is why GL is so rarely used these days for games.
Sigh. Rant over.
We added VBO support in 2004 and we were regularly bitten in the arse because no game was using them. Even Doom3 didn't use VBOs fully. ATI only cared about DirectX for ages and with no new iD engine pushing it forward, GL has stagnated horribly, particularly in driver support. Only nVidia really implemented it properly. Result - when you're trying to use all these new 'recommended' feature sets and 'best practice' paradigms for modern cards across both platforms, poor GL support continually comes up and pisses on your chips. And then people have a go at you and say 'Engine X supports GL better!' even though the actual reason is that Engine X uses GL standards from 5 years ago when iD were still championing GL and thus the hardware & drivers are actually ok with that. Anyone trying to push forward is fighting a land war in Asia. This is why GL is so rarely used these days for games.
Sigh. Rant over.
-
- Gnoblar
- Posts: 11
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 1:07 pm
So It's very good info. I like Linux! so cross platform engines:) OK, OpenGL problem is solved, now We can discussion about shaders:) Irrlicht problem is one:( no official shaders, but lot of users write very god shaders. I hope than some will be add to official SDK. I have one question. In Ogre multipass work fine? What technique is in Multipassing system? Where I can find some demo with multilights above 8? I need it for test (Ogre Multi Lighting Vs. Irrlicht Multi Lighting). Only OpenGL, I don't like DX:)
- Praetor
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 3335
- Joined: Tue Jun 21, 2005 8:26 pm
- Location: Rochester, New York, US
- x 3
- Contact:
Since I got my laptop (nVidia) I've noticed quite a dramatic decrease in problems. I've liked ATI's hardware a lot in the past, but I agree that their lack of commitment to OGL is frustrating.
Game Development, Engine Development, Porting
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
http://www.darkwindmedia.com
- Evak
- Orc Shaman
- Posts: 707
- Joined: Sun Apr 02, 2006 7:51 pm
- Location: Sacramento, CA
- x 1
- Contact:
Ogre handles shaders very well and is more flexible than .FX. It's just a bit of a mind twister for an artist like me to figure out what code goes where in the various Ogre files.
An FX file is a single file that contains all the info. Ogre uses 2-4 files that each contain chunks of the .FX file. Often you just copy and paste, add some declarations to your PS and VS in your shader file and change a few things related to mul around. A single line of code can be pasted in to take care of binormal calculations on the GPU.
You then copy and paste your streams directly from your FX to your .program file. Add your entry points and input to your .program file, and texture units to your material script. And 90% of the time it just works.
So its mostly cut paste and minimal tweaks to get a hlsl .FX file to work, its just all the juggling between seperate files that makes it confusing.
OUr coder that learnt how to convert my shaderFX created shaders into ogre in 2 days without any prior shader knowledge and thinks a parser would be easy to create and he may eventualy create one.
I managed to convert a couple of simpler ones myself, but the more complex the more easily I get confused and make mistakes, so it can take me hours hehe.
An FX file is a single file that contains all the info. Ogre uses 2-4 files that each contain chunks of the .FX file. Often you just copy and paste, add some declarations to your PS and VS in your shader file and change a few things related to mul around. A single line of code can be pasted in to take care of binormal calculations on the GPU.
You then copy and paste your streams directly from your FX to your .program file. Add your entry points and input to your .program file, and texture units to your material script. And 90% of the time it just works.
So its mostly cut paste and minimal tweaks to get a hlsl .FX file to work, its just all the juggling between seperate files that makes it confusing.
OUr coder that learnt how to convert my shaderFX created shaders into ogre in 2 days without any prior shader knowledge and thinks a parser would be easy to create and he may eventualy create one.
I managed to convert a couple of simpler ones myself, but the more complex the more easily I get confused and make mistakes, so it can take me hours hehe.
Last edited by Evak on Wed Jul 04, 2007 7:28 pm, edited 1 time in total.
-
- Greenskin
- Posts: 100
- Joined: Wed Nov 22, 2006 4:51 pm
I've been very pleased with Ogre thus far. I've made a few optimizations and changes to it to facilitate more 2D work (which my game is mostly going to be). Overall, I've found the engine easy to work with, and the people who work on Ogre and the community to be big help in providing clues to bugs. 99% of the time, it's the person (me!) who isn't doing something right, but they still help investigate and provide feedback.
The only problem with Ogre is CEGUI, which just isn't ready for prime-time in my opinion. I'm writing my own xml-lua based UI and enjoying it!
So, two thumbs way up for Ogre. I plan on making my (eventually commercial) game run on mac, linux and windows, and holding out hope for some ports of this engine to some consoles someday in the future.
(I don't want to say what I'm working on yet, but it's going to be very popular if I deliver it well, and I won't settle for B style games.)
I haven't tested Irrilict, but I'm pleased enough with Ogre not to need to investigate it.
Great job Ogre team! I'm very grateful to all you for your hard work. It's enabling me to focus mostly on my game engine technology and being creative with my content.
The only problem with Ogre is CEGUI, which just isn't ready for prime-time in my opinion. I'm writing my own xml-lua based UI and enjoying it!
So, two thumbs way up for Ogre. I plan on making my (eventually commercial) game run on mac, linux and windows, and holding out hope for some ports of this engine to some consoles someday in the future.
(I don't want to say what I'm working on yet, but it's going to be very popular if I deliver it well, and I won't settle for B style games.)
I haven't tested Irrilict, but I'm pleased enough with Ogre not to need to investigate it.
Great job Ogre team! I'm very grateful to all you for your hard work. It's enabling me to focus mostly on my game engine technology and being creative with my content.
-
- Greenskin
- Posts: 149
- Joined: Sat Apr 14, 2007 1:27 pm
Actually the Ogre OpenGL render runs better on my current pc than the DX one, especially when shaders are involved.
One of the things that Irrlicht really lacks is decent terrain handling, that was a few months ago when I checked it out. Also I dont like the coding conventions and the overall structure, but I guess thats mainly because I'm used to Java.
One of the things that Irrlicht really lacks is decent terrain handling, that was a few months ago when I checked it out. Also I dont like the coding conventions and the overall structure, but I guess thats mainly because I'm used to Java.
- Duncan Mac Leod
- Halfling
- Posts: 79
- Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 12:27 am
- Location: Germany
- Contact:
I think that nadro had never used Ogre in-depth. He does not know what he compares...
We have used Irrlicht for more than one year till we switched to Ogre...
Irrlicht does not have a (mesh)format of its own, has no material scripts and misses so many features that we had to modify the irrlicht engine very often and it was also a pain to apply all these modifications after a new version had been released...
From our point of view it's a neat little engine if you want to get into 3D Coding very fast, but if you are going to develop some serious stuff or a commercial title, it's really not mature enough to go with...
just my 2 cents... (no offense!)
We have used Irrlicht for more than one year till we switched to Ogre...
Irrlicht does not have a (mesh)format of its own, has no material scripts and misses so many features that we had to modify the irrlicht engine very often and it was also a pain to apply all these modifications after a new version had been released...
From our point of view it's a neat little engine if you want to get into 3D Coding very fast, but if you are going to develop some serious stuff or a commercial title, it's really not mature enough to go with...
just my 2 cents... (no offense!)
- deficite
- Gremlin
- Posts: 160
- Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 4:31 pm
- Location: TN, USA
- Contact:
So I can write this off as irrelevant? Many of the things you state here are rubbish. Shoot me or what have you; it's really childish to come to an engine you don't like's community and tell them how bad you think they are. Doesn't work on Linux my ass! Linux is my primary development environment! And I have a Radeon card too!
Before you try to explain something to people who are experienced with it, try to learn it better yourself. What was your goal in writing this anyway? OGRE is open source. If you think something is wrong with it, then fix it.
Before you try to explain something to people who are experienced with it, try to learn it better yourself. What was your goal in writing this anyway? OGRE is open source. If you think something is wrong with it, then fix it.
- sinbad
- OGRE Retired Team Member
- Posts: 19269
- Joined: Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:19 pm
- Location: Guernsey, Channel Islands
- x 66
- Contact:
Yes, we have a multipass system, have had since 2003. You can use either explicit passes or use automatic pass iteration, which can run a certain pass per light, or per number of lights which are subject to a smart ordering system relative to both the camera and object being rendered. This ordering system can also be customised from outside to provide light prioritisation if you wish. When using multipass there is no limit on the number of lights (only frame rate), and we also have features like material-script controlled light clipping and scissoring in the latest version which can make multipass lighting even faster.nadro wrote:I have one question. In Ogre multipass work fine? What technique is in Multipassing system? Where I can find some demo with multilights above 8? I need it for test (Ogre Multi Lighting Vs. Irrlicht Multi Lighting). Only OpenGL, I don't like DX:)
So yeah, I think we've got it covered I would rate the features of our material system as 'cross-platform .FX on steroids'.
-
- Halfling
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:24 pm
deficite forgot to take his NERD pills this morning.deficite wrote:So I can write this off as irrelevant? Many of the things you state here are rubbish. Shoot me or what have you; it's really childish to come to an engine you don't like's community and tell them how bad you think they are. Doesn't work on Linux my ass! Linux is my primary development environment! And I have a Radeon card too!
Before you try to explain something to people who are experienced with it, try to learn it better yourself. What was your goal in writing this anyway? OGRE is open source. If you think something is wrong with it, then fix it.
-
- Halfling
- Posts: 51
- Joined: Mon Mar 26, 2007 3:24 pm
Thanks for the explanation sinbad that was very enlighting. Some engines may support opengl better because they have good probing capabilities and will detect when some drivers have broken or poor quality features. When they detect these features they simply fall back to using lesser quality algorithms but more compatible with old drivers.sinbad wrote:It doesn't help that ATI's GL support has regularly been shite, and they stopped updating drivers for older cards. Then I get people whining that Quake3 runs fine on their 9200 and therefore so should OGRE, despite the fact that Quake3 used only a few specific GL extensions which manufacturers then went on to make sure they impemented. Stuff that came later, including VBOs, got ignored for ages.
We added VBO support in 2004 and we were regularly bitten in the arse because no game was using them. Even Doom3 didn't use VBOs fully. ATI only cared about DirectX for ages and with no new iD engine pushing it forward, GL has stagnated horribly, particularly in driver support. Only nVidia really implemented it properly. Result - when you're trying to use all these new 'recommended' feature sets and 'best practice' paradigms for modern cards across both platforms, poor GL support continually comes up and pisses on your chips. And then people have a go at you and say 'Engine X supports GL better!' even though the actual reason is that Engine X uses GL standards from 5 years ago when iD were still championing GL and thus the hardware & drivers are actually ok with that. Anyone trying to push forward is fighting a land war in Asia. This is why GL is so rarely used these days for games.
Sigh. Rant over.
I don't know if such a benchmark exists for Ogre but it would help a lot in clearing misunderstandings and get better feedback from your users. Just a suggestion.