Show Your Support: This site is primarily supported by advertisements. Ads are what have allowed this site to be maintained on a daily basis for the past 18+ years. We do our best to ensure only clean, relevant ads are shown, when any nasty ads are detected, we work to remove them ASAP. If you would like to view the site without ads while still supporting our work, please consider our ad-free Phoronix Premium.
WineD3D Optimistic In Their Yet To Be Proven Vulkan Backend, DXVK "Dead End"
Back when the WineD3D Vulkan plans were made known there was the drama over not using DXVK instead and their reasons why. We've seen the start of the basic work towards ultimately providing a Vulkan-based WineD3D back-end but it isn't yet usable for gamers today.
In an unrelated Wine mailing list discussion today about the Persistent Buffer Allocator (PBA) patches for improving the gaming experience, DXVK got brought up. To that CodeWeavers employee and lead WineD3D developer Henri Verbeet commented, "If you're interested in doing performance work though, I'd argue it would be more interesting to try to close the gap for those cases where DXVK is currently faster than wined3d. It's great that DXVK is working so well for some people, but it's also ultimately a dead end."
As a follow-up Henri commented, "The short version is that Wine's own Vulkan D3D backend should make DXVK superfluous in the long term."
If/when WineD3D's Vulkan support surpasses DXVK in terms of functionality and performance and support for as many games remains to be seen. For now Valve appears to be continuing to go full-throttle with DXVK with no signs of it letting up for the foreseeable future considering how well it's working today with many games and offering much better performance than what is possible with only Wine right now. Even for Wine's Direct3D support using their own DXVK library for Direct3D 12 to Vulkan, while some basic functionality is there, on the D3D12 front it's still far from being complete.