crackalackn wrote on 2025-03-16, 07:12:

I want to experiment with disabling virtualization to improve some game performance. Would it be detrimental to dgvoodoo2 to disable SVM or core isolation?

In my limited experience, disabling core isolation should benefit apps

crackalackn wrote on 2025-03-16, 07:12:

I want to experiment with disabling virtualization to improve some game performance. Would it be detrimental to dgvoodoo2 to disable SVM or core isolation?

No, of course dgVoodoo does not need virtualization.

Dege, thank you for the clarification. I would have guessed it didn't.. but I also don't really understand how this works.

The main reason it was even a concern is because graphics wrappers are listed under compatability/translation layers on this page about virtualization.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Virtualization

You should probably contact whomever is responsible and have them move it off that page. Disinformation is bad enough in the rest of the world, we don't need it in tech.
If they don't want graphics wrappers under their own page (I don't see why not) then put it it under an "API wrappers" page.

crackalackn wrote on 2025-03-17, 14:02:

Dege, thank you for the clarification. I would have guessed it didn't.. but I also don't really understand how this works.

The main reason it was even a concern is because graphics wrappers are listed under compatability/translation layers on this page about virtualization.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Virtualization

Yes, because dgVoodoo is a translation layer.
It converts and maps calls from a user mode API to another user mode API. That's all, it does not virtualize or emulate any hardware (even though it provides "virtual" video cards. They are virtual only to the application.)

Btw, that page section calls D3D9on12 a mapping layer, but I think it's wrong. There are no direct D3D12 equivalents of D3D9 display driver interface calls. D3D9on12 is a translation layer that can be used as a backend (driver) for the D3D9 API frontend.

Site says:

Compatibility layers are another common but less known type of virtualization which allows applications of a legacy or foreign system to run in environments it was never intended for.

I don't agree with it either. Compatibility layer could be more emulated, than virtualised

Dege wrote on 2025-03-17, 15:56:

Yes, because dgVoodoo is a translation layer. It converts and maps calls from a user mode API to another user mode API. That's a […]
Show full quote

crackalackn wrote on 2025-03-17, 14:02:

Dege, thank you for the clarification. I would have guessed it didn't.. but I also don't really understand how this works.

The main reason it was even a concern is because graphics wrappers are listed under compatability/translation layers on this page about virtualization.

https://www.pcgamingwiki.com/wiki/Virtualization

Yes, because dgVoodoo is a translation layer.
It converts and maps calls from a user mode API to another user mode API. That's all, it does not virtualize or emulate any hardware (even though it provides "virtual" video cards. They are virtual only to the application.)

Btw, that page section calls D3D9on12 a mapping layer, but I think it's wrong. There are no direct D3D12 equivalents of D3D9 display driver interface calls. D3D9on12 is a translation layer that can be used as a backend (driver) for the D3D9 API frontend.

Being a wiki I would assume it's all user generated and therefore prone to misinformstion. It seems accurate in general yet still questionable in some areas. That's why I come to the source!

I have to say I don't understand certain technical terms to your response but I think I get the gist. In my younger years I played around with emulators a lot and that screams "virtualization" to me now looking back. In laymen's terms, I don't get that feeling from dgvoodoo2. I think it's the lite nature of the files, the no loading of a game through the software (as in dgvoodoo2 doesn't run with the game), etc.

DosFreak wrote on 2025-03-17, 15:12:

You should probably contact whomever is responsible and have them move it off that page. Disinformation is bad enough in the rest of the world, we don't need it in tech.
If they don't want graphics wrappers under their own page (I don't see why not) then put it it under an "API wrappers" page.

I will see what I can do!