I have a fast computer and an RME audio interface.
 
One of the problems that is very difficult to avoid is that the plug ins (like Waves VSTs) have built in latency and will cause your DAW to have latency no matter how fast your hardware system is.  For instance if you have a Waves L3 in the signal chain the latency will increase by more than 3000 cycles.
 
One solution is to turn off your plug ins while tracking.
 
Another solution is to run your live synth in another VST shell with no plugs, so in essence you have a stand alone synth. Or load your synth in a separate computer.
 
I find this issue very annoying.
 
I would love to try an 18 core computer with fast everything, tell us how it works out.

I never had latency problems after I went with an RME soundcard, I highly recommend their products!

slyman
Then you don't need an i9 for that either...i5 is plenty. 
If you read his second post, OP says he wants the best stability and latency.
To achieve that. a fast computer is only half the battle.

But you failed to address the last line of that post which shows his reasoning (That an onboard sound card of an i9 system would outperform his Quad-Capture). 
 
He says he "loves his Quad Capture" so if he isn't having problems with it, telling him to go out and buy a $2-3000 interface only confuses the issue.

RexRed
My question is, wouldn't the integrated sound in this new PC coupled with the processors and ram speed at some point surpass the circuitry in the Roland Quad Capture? 
 
I would think the latency and speed of this integrated sound "Realtek" would far surpass that of the Quad Capture' inner circuitry... This is a tomahawk MSI x299 motherboard.
 
Thoughts? 

The drivers are an important consideration in terms of latency. Does Realtek provide ASIO drivers? If not, then the latency may be worse. Being integrated can also create noise problems - outboard gear is isolated from the electronics of the computer. I use a quad capture with my laptop and it's running at 64 samples. I play guitar so it's doing A/D as well as D/A conversion and the latency is acceptable to me. 

Can I ask a stupid question?  Why the concern about latency when you can monitor at the interface for zero latency? I see so much about latency, trying to trim it down with this and that...but why bother when you can just monitor at the interface?  The latency could be a full second...and why would it matter?  
 
Genuinely curious here.  If there's a good reason to worry about latency, I'd like to know.  So far, it just seems like a distraction for my wallet.  And maybe for the OP...

Voda La Void
Can I ask a stupid question?  Why the concern about latency when you can monitor at the interface for zero latency? I see so much about latency, trying to trim it down with this and that...but why bother when you can just monitor at the interface?  The latency could be a full second...and why would it matter?  
 
Genuinely curious here.  If there's a good reason to worry about latency, I'd like to know.  So far, it just seems like a distraction for my wallet.  And maybe for the OP...

Its a good question.
 
In the old days my reel to reel had a one second delay before the smpte locked. I didn't care.
 
But now we use soft synths played live with midi controllers, or play guitar into the DAW with a software amp emulator.  If you don't  use live soft synths or guitar plugs live, set your latency for the longest possible time, for stability. Life might be better just treating the DAW as a recorder and not a live instrument.