I have heard it was made by people from nuendo,that low latency mode is pretty solid!!,but I am getting much better preformance in ver 9 than 8.5,CPU meter does not wiggle like a fish anymore,even down to 16 buffers.but studio one is more stable at that buffer…thoughts?
Well. Silence means you are scared!!..no I still think there is no better mixing daw than cubase!!..there is nothing I can’t do with it
I’ve found Studio One to always have better performance than Cubas on both Mac and PC. I demoed 3.5 and it’s markedly better than before. Steinberg: Yes, you can upgrade the audio engine, just like Studio One did! 
So far I’m impressed with S1 v3.5…
Great performance and not a single crash so far.
So they have finally made something similar to ASIO Guard, better late than never.
Does yer music sound better?
From what I tested it look like Studio One’s low latency monitoring for instruments is responding roughly 50% slower than Cubase’s latency and slightly better than previous Studio One versions. Studio One’s latency with minimal dropout protection (and thus low latency disabled) is deteriorated to almost 150% slower than Cubase.
Regarding buffers < 32 samples. Studio One uses a minimal internal buffer of 64 samples. So 32 or 16 samples ASIO device buffer sizes actually perform much slower than they should. Needles to say the monitoring latency for instruments is higher too at < 32 sample buffer sizes because of that additional software buffer.
Dropout protection (dual buffer system) potentially is a nice idea. It basically duplicates the instruments + effects to the low latency path when they are monitored while the playback (non monitored) VST’s use a larger software buffer (ergo needs less processing power). There are some disadvantages though.
I personally am much more happy with Cubase’s straightforward real low latency, dynamic set it and forget it ASIO guard and when necessary Constrain delay compensation. But regarding VST instrument performance I could imaging for the melody clickers and grid stickers who don’t need actual low latency but do need to squeeze a little extra out of their system, Studio One’s “improved audio engine” rocks.
I have had great low latency performance with new pro 9 …much better than 8.5 ,no more CPU spikes at small buffer sizes …I usally run at 64 or 32 …but I can run my i7 at 16 buffers even with some plugs and vsti’s
In 3.5.1 the regular latency (Minimum setting) really went down drastically, so finally Studio One is on par (slightly better even) with other hosts.
With low latency monitoring enabled it’s even possible to achieve a virtual (because the reference material is delayed) low latency of ~3 ms at a buffer size of 128 samples at a sample rate of 44.1kHz.
The disadvantages of using low latency monitoring for instruments remain though.