I had just installed Windows 8 on my DAW (running X1 and X2) and been messing with it over the weekend. I was able to lower my buffers from 256 (6ms) to 128 (3 ms) with out any issues on a project with 32 tracks @ 48khz 24bit, with a smattering of effects.  I'm currently dual booting, just incase. The only driver issues I had was with LoopBe-30. When it tries to install the loop back midi devices (and fails), it would hose all the midi devices on my system. I uninstalled LoopBe and the problem went away.

Note, I do not use soft synths, just effects.

MOTU PCIx-424 
    24io
    2408 + 2x ultra gain 8 channel a/d converters
    total of 48 inputs (all used) and 48 outputs (20 used)

usb devices:
    2x MOTU Midi Express 128s (all ports in use)
    Line 6 POD HD, Pod XT Pro
    Blofeld
    Radias
    Novation Launch Pad
    BCF2000
    BCR2000
    MAudio Venom
    Korg KAOSS Pad
    Shuttle Pro 2
    
The PC is a bit less than so-so, but it works for what I do:
    Running 64bit OS and apps
    AMD Athlon II X2 255 3.11 Ghz
    8 GB ram
    2x 500gb SATA2 main drive (One for Win 7, one for Win 8)
    4x80gb eSata RAID 10
 
Can't say that it was "oh my god its so much faster" but I did notice that the machine is more responsive with Windows 8, and as I said, I can use smaller buffers that I could not before.  So the claims that Windows 8 is worse than Windows 7, in my case, is not true at all.

js516
  
Can't say that it was "oh my god its so much faster" but I did notice that the machine is more responsive with Windows 8, and as I said, I can use smaller buffers that I could not before.  So the claims that Windows 8 is worse than Windows 7, in my case, is not true at all.

Problem with this kind of thing is that a fresh install always feels more responsive.  Just rebuild your Windows 7 machine and you'd get that effect.


This is the very reason we do need benchmarking.

Both are fresh installs, on a dual boot system, each install on a dedicated drive.

I fudgied up my drive and had to reinstall everything. :(

The main point is that my reported latency went down by half of what it is under Windows 7 : 6ms to 3 ms on a 32 track project @ 48kz 24bit, running on a less than so-so machine.

The main point is that my reported latency went down by half of what it is under Windows 7

 
This matches up with that John was saying - one person's combination of hardware, drivers and software may not give the same results as another's.  So in your case it's a positive, even if it's not for someone else using a different DAW, hardware and drivers (like on the Gearslutz thread).  
 
But this is no surprise in my book since it seems just like everything else in DAW/PC land...
 

FWIW, Unless you like testing... you'd be well advised to sit out the first 6 months or so of Win8.
It's been the same with every *major* new OS release (Win7 wasn't such a radical change - a very smooth transition - what Vista's initial release could have been IMO).
 
Benchmarks are great for comparison, but one could point out that many benchmarks aren't exactly real-world projects.  Also, Win8 is an infant of an OS.  We need BIOS updates, driver updates for the core hardware/components, driver updates for audio specific hardware, and updates for the OS itself.
In short, it's not surprising that Win8 performs less than stellar at initial release.
Remember the initial release of Vista?  Same exact situation.
It's also not surprising to see radical differences in reported performance.
Look at some of the posts here.  We have everything ranging from terrible performance (20+% lower)... to performance roughly equal to Win7.
Far too many variables in play (this early on) to make absolute statements of (long-term) fact.
Far too many variables in play (at this moment) to use Win8 in a mission critical environment.  

I think there's another facet that might be in play.
Cakewalk have some users who *are* using Win8 (even though it's not currently the most rock-solid choice).
As a business and a Microsoft partner, I'd imagine Cakewalk is trying to put a good/positive step forward.
These users aren't going to want to hear that Win8 (currently) sucks.
ie: I was quite vocal in my disappointment in the initial release of Vista.  I ruffled a lot of feathers saying so...  
Cakewalk as a business is in a different situation than the rest of us.  We can avoid Win8 (at least for mission critical scenarios) for the time being.  Cakewalk has to make the best of it.

FWIW, Unless you like testing... you'd be well advised to sit out the first 6 months or so of Win8.

 
Jim, that's far too sensible an outlook to be posting here.
 
One should always mess up a perfectly working system in order to migrate to a new OS at the earliest opportunity.

Here's a nice set of benchmarks made by Vin where he discloses that most I/O gear on the market has a differing latency than is reported to your DAW.

 
Really Mike?
 
Is this a new revelation to you?
 
Sonar has had the ability for you to measure the unreported bit and make the adjustment yourself ever since I can remember.
 
I would think it is one of the things many people will do when they first install any DAW to get the figures needed to compensate for each sample rate you are likely to be using.
 
And you want people to take YOU seriously?
 
Is this quote humour, irony or what?
 
If you are using an ASIO driver then I'd wager Sonar's reported latency compensation will be within 10-20 samples of accuracy, the only reason you'd need more accuracy than that is if you are loopback recording through your own interface in which case use the CEntrance, to get the exact figure or if you are using WDM do it by eye and taking into acount the nudge distance to make them line up perfectly.
 
Job done.
 
Incidentally Sonar's latency compensation including PDC is pretty much the best I've come across on anything.  Mostly you'd never need bother with manual adjustments in the normal course of DAW operation.
 
Stay away from latency eating plug-ins during tracking (convo verbs, things with large lookahead times etc.) and it's is pretty much a subject you can be dismissing, unless near real-time latency is critical to what you are doing when tracking, as Craig has discussed already.  

re: benefits of bench testing
I bought a Stealth PC from Vin almost 2 years ago and shipped him my Focusrites and he bench tested and configured the system.
The result- i have been unable to crash the Sonar ,not once.No glitches or dropouts-nothing-absolutely reliable.
(but then i`m still on 8.5.3 and only recording 16 tracks live @24/48-hope i`m still welcome here)
To me,that was worth every single extra penny and my personal opinion is to buy or upgrade to the best dedicated pc you can afford from Jim Roseberry etc or Vin if you`re down here and have them personalise it for you (bench test?)and remove all margin for error and conflicts and save a lot of grief and visits to the forums. 
with respect
tony

Hey Tony!
Still gotta pull my finger out and get over and visit you. It's been a mad year.

hey mike,
i should come over and see if you can find me an acceptable X2 GUI to convince me to upgrade . 
cheers