I have worked a fair amount with the zwo api to control an asi1600 camera - and here are some numbers comparing exposure/download times to sgp.
If I use the frame and focus tool with the asi1600 over usb 3.0 - the exposure and download time for 1ms exposures is just over 5 seconds with image history enabled - and just over 2 seconds with it disabled.
So a big part of the delay people may be seeing is due to the image analysis and star measurement that are part of the image history tool.
But 2 seconds is still a fair amount of overhead.
If I do sustained video recording I can get just over 8 fps with full frame 16-bit images - which agrees with what sharpcap can do. So there is no magic in sharpcap that goes beyond what the zwo api can achieve.
If I do a single expose/download with my code, it takes 0.21 seconds to start and complete the single exposure, then 0.08 seconds to download it, then 0.11s to save it to fits on an ssd drive.
If I do a 10s exposure, there is 0.18s overhead to take the exposure, then 0.05s to download it, then 0.09s to save it.
So there is some fluctuation in these numbers, but about 0.2s overhead to setup and take the exposure and around 0.2s to download and save it to fits.
In video mode there is much less overhead. The ideal way to do lucky imaging would be to run in video mode for a time, then stop and dither, then continue video mode. The win for lucky imaging in that case compared to the current overhead would be huge. But sgp isn’t really designed for lucky imaging in the first place. And I don’t think sharpcap is set up for dithering - I’m not sure.
But if sgp is already working directly with the zwo api, and if a fair number of people want to operate in lucky imaging mode with occasional dithering - there is a huge win possible.