I updated my MOTU drivers when I built my new box and the drivers now default to WaveRT.
Everything seems to work just fine. A lot of my standalone synth plugins don't work but I don't really use them that way.
What are the main benefits of WaveRT over ASIO?
Thanks

I'm a Motu user, so I'll give this a shot...
 
There's really not a whole lot of advantage one way or the other. I've used both WaveRT and ASIO and they both work wonderfully. Both are streaming audio interfaces which allow for the adjustment of a sample buffer size.
 
MOTU provides a very complete set of drivers, Both WaveRT and ASIO, as well as the old MME interfaces are available for applications that need them. For myself, I have had no problems with the Motu drivers.
 

TomHelvey
I updated my MOTU drivers when I built my new box and the drivers now default to WaveRT.
Everything seems to work just fine. A lot of my standalone synth plugins don't work but I don't really use them that way.
What are the main benefits of WaveRT over ASIO?
Thanks

Funny that you should mention this Tom.  MOTU added WaveRT capability ages ago to their drivers, but it never really worked very well.  After updating my MOTU drivers, I started running Sonar and everything was working great.  Sonar had defaulted to WaveRT and it was so seamless, I didn't even notice (I usually run ASIO).
 
All I can say is that MOTU has absolutely nailed WaveRT in their latest drivers.  I can now run at way lower latency, very stably with WaveRT.
 
I guess use whatever works best for you.  But with the newer MOTU drivers, WaveRT is as good an option, if not better at low latency, than anything else.  So I guess we are lucky - we have more driver options now than most.