Sort of silly you telling me "I should not make such a claim". I am and I can back it up and have backed it up. You could go for a calm debate here... But hey you just rest on your one windows 7 test and proclaim these as truths and tell off anybody who is incompatible with your viewpoint. These questions are specifically targeted at you. I am happy to listen to any decent answers you have and discuss them. 1. How did you isolate and measure ASIO performance ? ASIO generally cuts through most windows libraries and layers anyway that's why it's best at performance. 2. Since when is ASIO driver a windows service? It's a driver/DLL. So how would giving priority to background services help? 3. A DAW developer stated this. So I shouldn't be quoting this because I might mislead people? What do you find wrong with this statement as below? In the interests of a balanced debate you could have argued that the NI hardware service may end up with better performance. 4) Did you test with this enabled and disabled? Please don't argue with me unless you have specific answers to my points above 1-4 and come up with a test on window 10 that can specifically prove your point. Another thing, did I actually specifically mention ASIO performance here? Nope you brought that one up. ASIO has nothing to do with this. Regardless giving priority to a low level driver is not going to happen when you give priority to background services or programs using this method. It will make no difference to it's performance. I suspect there are probably other reasons why your test gave the results it did (check the Devs quote above) , regardless it's certainly very old and non conclusive. And I don't see any results published anywhere.