XDA’s reporting offers a reassuring example: its cited Cyberpunk 2077 test recorded a 1% low of 116.8 FPS with Memory Integrity enabled, against 124.5 FPS with it disabled. That is measurable, but hardly a gaming disaster. It also is not enough evidence to promise that every modern PC will experience an insignificant difference.
The sensible response is to check your setting, understand what it protects, and investigate only if something has actually changed. A benchmark should inform a security decision—not make it automatically.
What changed in the November Windows 11 update?
The relevant change appeared in the October 28, 2026 preview update, KB5127936, for Windows 11 versions 25H2 and 26H2. Microsoft describes expanded Memory Integrity protection for eligible devices, with supported PCs potentially receiving automatic enablement during updates. Its wording explicitly preserves existing user or IT administrator choices.
The November security update includes that preview’s improvements. Microsoft lists the following version and edition coverage for KB5132061:
| Windows 11 version | Editions covered | Resulting OS build |
|---|---|---|
| 26H2 | All editions | 26300.9974 |
| 25H2 | All editions | 26200.9974 |
| 24H2 | Enterprise and Education | 26100.9974 |
Microsoft’s November documentation also says the 24H2 Enterprise and Education package includes improvements previously released for 25H2 and 26H2 in October’s non-security preview. Consequently, the update’s scope should not be reduced to consumer 25H2 and 26H2 PCs, nor extended to every edition of 24H2.
Three distinctions matter:
- Update installation and feature activation are not identical. Installing the cumulative update does not establish that Memory Integrity became enabled.
- Eligibility is conditional. Microsoft says supported PCs may receive the change.
- Existing choices matter. The release note does not describe an unconditional override of user preferences or organizational policy.
The practical takeaway: inspect the actual setting rather than inferring its state from the KB number.
Memory Integrity is protection, not a performance tweak
Memory Integrity is the Windows Security name for Hypervisor-Protected Code Integrity, or HVCI. It uses virtualization-based security, commonly abbreviated VBS, to place kernel-mode code-integrity enforcement in an isolated environment. Microsoft explains that this design strengthens protection against malware attempting to exploit the Windows kernel.
In ordinary language, Windows is protecting the mechanism that checks sensitive code—not simply asking potentially compromised parts of the operating system to police themselves.
Microsoft’s Device Security documentation describes the user-facing benefit as making it harder for malicious programs to use low-level drivers to hijack a PC. Its explanation is important because drivers are not just another application: they help hardware communicate with Windows and operate in security-sensitive territory.
HVCI and VBS are related, but they are not interchangeable labels. HVCI is a security feature that uses VBS. That distinction matters when interpreting benchmarks: a test that changes several virtualization-related settings is not necessarily measuring Memory Integrity alone. Microsoft’s architecture documentation establishes that relationship.
Turning the feature off therefore represents a trade-off, not the discovery of a free performance setting Microsoft forgot to advertise. Whether that trade-off is justified depends on a reproducible problem and the value of the improvement—not just an alarming headline.
Why newer hardware can handle it better
There is a technical basis for expecting smaller overhead on suitably equipped processors.
Microsoft says Memory Integrity works better with Intel Kaby Lake and newer processors supporting Mode-Based Execution Control, and AMD Zen 2 and newer processors supporting Guest Mode Execute Trap. Older processors rely on emulation called Restricted User Mode, which carries a greater performance impact. Hardware support reduces an important source of overhead; it does not guarantee zero overhead.
The feature also predates this rollout. Microsoft’s OEM documentation describes default enablement on compatible clean installations of Windows 11 and on Secured-core PCs. Its established clean-install requirements include compatible drivers, enabled firmware virtualization, an SSD of at least 64GB, and at least 8GB RAM for x64 systems. Processor criteria include Intel eighth-generation or later beginning with Windows 11 22H2, AMD Zen 2 or newer, and Qualcomm Snapdragon 8180 or newer, with documented exceptions.
Those are clean-install default-enablement criteria, not a newly verified eligibility checklist for the November rollout. Microsoft’s OEM page explicitly distinguishes clean installs from upgrades. It would be misleading to copy that table and present it as the complete targeting logic for this update.
The distinction explains why two Windows 11 machines may begin from different positions: one may already have the protection enabled, while another needs its actual configuration checked. “Windows 11 supports it” is not the same as “this PC was already running it.”
What the gaming results actually establish
XDA’s reported Cyberpunk 2077 result deserves a careful reading:
| Reported metric | Memory Integrity on | Memory Integrity off |
|---|---|---|
| Cyberpunk 2077 1% low | 116.8 FPS | 124.5 FPS |
The difference is 7.7 FPS. Calculated against the disabled result, enabling Memory Integrity reduced the reported metric by approximately 6.2%. Calculated in the opposite direction, disabling it improved the enabled result by approximately 6.6%. Both calculations describe the same measurements; their denominators differ.
That percentage distinction prevents a common reporting mistake: a 6.6% improvement when switching something off does not automatically mean a 6.6% reduction when switching it on.
More importantly, this is a 1% low result, not average FPS. It should not be rewritten as “Cyberpunk loses 6.2% of its average performance.” XDA’s September report does provide the test details: a Ryzen 5 7600X with an RTX 4070 Ti Super at 1080p on the low preset, three runs per condition, and average FPS of 183.1 with Memory Integrity on versus 186.5 with it off alongside the 1% lows.
My reading is that the result supports reassurance without supporting dismissal. Someone chasing the strongest possible performance may reasonably care about the difference. Someone whose games remain satisfactory has not been given a compelling reason to remove protection preemptively.
Other tests support caution in both directions
Digital Trends supplies useful first-hand comparison data. It reports testing a Core i5-13600K and RTX 3060 Ti across six games at 1080p, finding improvements below 3% in most cases after disabling Memory Integrity and related virtualization features. Assassin’s Creed Valhalla improved by 4.5%, Gears Tactics by 4.6%, Uncharted: Legacy of Thieves by 2.8%, and Far Cry 6 by 1.8%. Shadow of the Tomb Raider and Cyberpunk 2077 changed very little.
The qualifier “related virtualization features” matters. These results provide context, but should not be presented as a perfectly isolated HVCI-only experiment or combined with XDA’s result into a universal performance estimate.
Digital Trends also acknowledges substantially larger losses in other testing. The responsible conclusion is not that security overhead disappeared; it is that the outcome depends on the hardware, game, and test configuration.
How to check or change Memory Integrity
For an ordinary, unmanaged Windows 11 PC, Microsoft documents this route:
- Open Start → Settings.
- Select Privacy & security → Windows Security.
- Open Device security.
- Under Core isolation, select Core isolation details.
- Inspect the Memory integrity toggle.
- If you deliberately choose to disable it, switch it to Off and restart the PC. Microsoft says the restart is required for the change to take effect.
Simply checking the page does not require changing anything. Record its starting state before troubleshooting, and after a change and restart, return to the page to confirm the intended setting.
Microsoft also documents enabling Memory Integrity through Windows Security. If a comparison produces no worthwhile benefit, my recommendation is to restore protection rather than leave it disabled out of habit.
These consumer steps are not a promise that every managed computer exposes an unrestricted toggle. Organizational configuration may determine the result.
Test a suspected slowdown without changing everything
If performance seems worse after an update, treat Memory Integrity as a hypothesis—not a verdict.
For a useful comparison, I recommend the following procedure:
- Record the starting configuration. Note the game, graphics settings, resolution, driver version, and Memory Integrity state.
- Choose a repeatable workload. Prefer a built-in benchmark or the same reproducible gameplay sequence.
- Run several baseline passes. Three runs are a reasonable starting point; retain the individual results.
- Change only Memory Integrity, if you accept temporarily removing that protection. Restart before testing.
- Repeat the identical workload. Keep other settings and background activity as consistent as possible.
- Compare the result with run-to-run variation. Look for an improvement that repeats, rather than selecting the best isolated score.
- Restore your chosen final configuration and verify it.
This is a recommended troubleshooting method, not a benchmark performed by WindowsForum or a guarantee of any particular gain.
Do not simultaneously disable unrelated protections, change firmware options, adjust the power configuration, and install another graphics driver. Even if performance improves, that experiment cannot tell you which change mattered.
The decision should be proportional. A small, inconsistent difference is weak evidence for giving up protection. A substantial, repeatable difference is worth investigating—but still deserves an explicit security trade-off.
Driver compatibility may matter more than FPS
A blocked driver can be a more immediate problem than a modest benchmark difference.
Microsoft’s “A driver can’t load on this device” guidance says Memory Integrity can prevent a driver from loading. Its first recommendation is to obtain an updated, compatible driver through Windows Update or the driver manufacturer, rather than immediately disabling the feature.
If that happens:
- Record the driver and company names shown in the notification.
- Look for a compatible update from the appropriate manufacturer.
- If none exists, ask the manufacturer whether a fix is planned.
- Consider disabling Memory Integrity only after understanding the consequence.
Microsoft warns that disabling it on a Secured-core PC removes the device’s Secured-core state. It also notes that unresolved driver problems can leave associated functionality unavailable.
Microsoft’s broader guidance warns that incompatible software or drivers can cause malfunctions and, rarely, boot failures. A system that cannot start normally needs recovery troubleshooting, not an improvised gaming optimization routine.
What IT administrators should take from this
For managed fleets, the priority is predictable security configuration and application compatibility—not reproducing a consumer benchmark.
Microsoft documents management through Windows Security, Intune, Group Policy, and other deployment mechanisms. Its guidance recommends testing compatible configurations on a group of computers before wider deployment. Administrators should therefore validate policy, representative drivers, and business-critical applications rather than assume the consumer toggle is the whole management story.
My practical recommendation is to include Memory Integrity state in troubleshooting records. Separate “the update installed,” “the protection became enabled,” and “an application failed” into distinct observations. Establishing the sequence is more useful than treating every post-update symptom as proof of the same cause.
The bottom line
Leave Memory Integrity enabled unless you have a demonstrated reason to reconsider it. That is a recommendation based on the documented protection and the limited, configuration-dependent performance evidence—not a claim that gaming overhead is always negligible.
The November rollout merits attention, but not an emergency trip through every security switch in Windows. Check what changed, update incompatible drivers, and measure any suspected performance problem carefully.
For gamers, the useful question is not whether HVCI can cost frames. It can. The useful question is whether the cost on your PC is repeatable and important enough to justify removing the protection.
Correction (November 11, 2026): An earlier version of this article said XDA’s report on the Cyberpunk 2077 test was from November and did not include the hardware configuration, settings, run methodology, or average-FPS results. The report was published on September 14, 2026, and it does include those details: a Ryzen 5 7600X with an RTX 4070 Ti Super at 1080p on the low preset, three runs per condition, and average FPS of 183.1 with Memory Integrity on versus 186.5 with it off.