DMA Cheats Compared: Documented Products and Games

The DMA comparison brings together documented public listings, their recorded game associations and any published plan terms. Direct memory access, or DMA, is an ordinary hardware capability. A DMA cheat is the misuse of that capability in a gaming context, as Riot Games describes in its account of Vanguard. Activision also names DMA-based cheating hardware in its account of the Call of Duty cheating ecosystem. Neither publisher source confirms the current function of any listing here.

The broader catalogue figure in the opening counts 96 DMA-tagged provider-product listings among 1,492 qualifying listings, linked to four provider records among 80. The catalogue groups dma, dma_based and dma_cheat labels, counting each row once within that group. A row is a provider-product listing, not proof of a distinct underlying product. The listings shown on this page form a narrower group: only those attached to eligible public provider profiles appear. The two populations must not be read as the same count.

The providers directory collects the site's public profiles; it is the wider commercial context for this filtered DMA page. The separate DMA explainer defines the hardware term and its use in cheating without trying to compare listings.

Sources: [1][2]

The visible DMA listings must come from provider profiles already approved for public display. A catalogue record alone is insufficient: the public listing needs a source, a date and an eligible provider identity. This eligibility rule is why the displayed set can be smaller than the 96 DMA-tagged records in the broader catalogue. A missing row does not mean a provider has no DMA-labeled offer; it means that row is outside the public comparison under the current rules.

The type label records how the offer was categorized from source material. It is not a test of the device, software or service. The catalogue may contain multiple sellers, payment variants or near-duplicate names. A listed row should not be described as a unique underlying product unless that identity has independent support. Activision notes that reseller branding can make one underlying cheating product appear to be several different offers; that publisher observation supports caution, not an exact deduplication rate for this catalogue.

CheatsMatch's rating method explains how provider claims, source dates and stronger corroboration are separated. The eligibility rule for this page should be read with that evidence method, rather than as a recommendation.

Sources: [2]

The public DMA listings below provide the comparison. They show eligible provider profiles and their approved public records, with links back to those profiles. Read each item as a documented provider claim at a stated check date. The category label does not establish how a product behaves now, whether it is available to a new customer, or whether two sellers are offering different underlying products.

Use the visible records to compare stated scope and the strength of the source trail. Where two rows make the same claim, the useful difference may be a later check date, a clearer original source or a distinct provider identity. If no public eligible row appears, there is no supported comparison to manufacture from the broader catalogue. The games directory remains a route to game-specific pages, each with its own evidence limits.

A game association means a source or catalogue record names a game alongside a DMA-labeled listing. It is not a test of compatibility. Some recorded associations are inferred or unresolved, so a game link appears here only when the public listing has a supported association and a live game page. A seller's named game and a publisher's anti-cheat statement are different kinds of evidence.

Riot's Vanguard article discusses DMA abuse in its own competitive games. That context helps explain why a reader may see DMA and VALORANT discussed together, but it does not validate any provider's VALORANT claim. The VALORANT page gives the game-specific comparison context. For every visible association, read the original source and check date before inferring what a provider said.

Sources: [1]

Public DMA plan terms are meaningful only with their currency, duration, source and check date attached. A one-month label should remain a one-month label; a 30-day label is a different recorded term. A missing price can mean that no eligible public amount was available for the comparison, not that the offer is free. Published plan information also cannot establish the final checkout total, future availability or how long a claimed service will function.

A displayed amount needs an eligible public source, currency and plan term. Do not infer a price from the broader catalogue or another provider's row. Compare a displayed amount with other rows on the same currency and term, and return to its source if the date matters to a decision. This page does not present a market-wide DMA price average.

The DMA catalogue documents claims, not field tests. Riot and Activision explain why DMA abuse appears in their anti-cheat work, but neither primary source is a product-by-product assessment of the listings on this page. A provider profile can report a game, a hardware label and a plan without independently proving performance, detection status or safety. An approved public profile means the record passes publication rules, not that CheatsMatch endorses the product.

The count of 96 comes from a dated broader catalogue extract; it is not a count of visible public rows, distinct underlying products or successful cheats. The four associated provider records likewise are catalogue records, not a claim about the current public subset. A reader comparing claims can use the source date, provider identity and explicit limits to decide which questions remain unanswered. The provider evaluation guide explains how to assess such evidence across categories.

The hardware terminology guide separates card, fuser and firmware labels before you compare a listing.

Sources: [1][2]