When comparing Ogre3D vs Amethyst, the Slant community recommends Ogre3D for most people. In the question“What are the best 3D game engines?” Ogre3D is ranked 22nd while Amethyst is ranked 26th. The most important reason people chose Ogre3D is:
Direct3D 9 & 11, Metal, Vulkan, OpenGL (incl. ES2, ES3 and OGL3+) and WebGL (Emscripten) support.
Specs
Ranked in these QuestionsQuestion Ranking
Pros
Pro Platform support
Direct3D 9 & 11, Metal, Vulkan, OpenGL (incl. ES2, ES3 and OGL3+) and WebGL (Emscripten) support.
Pro Good user community
It's been around a long time and still has a very strong user community.
Pro It's free and open-source
Amethyst is published under the MIT license making it open-source and id offered completely free. This allows anyone to give the tiling window manger a try, which is great.
Pro Recently updated and rewritten in Swift.
The application was written in Objective-C, but was recently updated and completely rewritten in Apple's new native language Swift.
Pro Works with keyboard shortcuts, no mouse needed
As it's designed to work closely to how xmonad, Amethyst uses keyboard shortcuts to control the windows being used, meaning no mouse input is necessary. This can make for a faster way to control windows.
Pro Multi-monitor suppport
Pro Has many common layouts to choose from (fullscreen, floating, row, column, wide, etc)
Pro Can switch between tiling and floating mode
Pro Under active development
Pro Configured via UI
No CONFIG file provides security and will avoid making amethyst crash. Instead configured via simple UI
Pro True tiling means never losing track of windows under a huge pile of others
Cons
Con Can be buggy at times
Con There are more user friendly window managers available
There are certainly more user friendly window managers available for MacOS, such as Divvy or Moom. Amethyst, however, is more powerful and customizable than the more user friendly options available and therefore may be a better choice for a user looking for more advanced capabilities and customization.