Memory upgrade to 16 or 32 GB

@support I had persistent crashes and connection issues using Roon with my Nucleus+
due to the size of my library of 500,000 tracks.

I’ve taken the Nucleus to a computer shop and I’d like to hear from someone who’s upgraded memory, either on a Nucleus or a NUC to comment about upgrading to 16GB OR 32GB.

For people with large libraries, did 32GB make a difference or as some people have mentioned is there much difference using Roon between 16 and 32?

For that size of library a recommendation of 32GB RAM was already given back in 2018:


I took a more than 11 year old Acer Aspire 8943G with 16 GB RAM and 2 SSD each 1 TB up to 1.4 million tracks. It has a Core i7-720QM (4x 1.60 GHz) and a Radeon HD 5850 (DDR3 VRAM). Great at the time, certainly not up to great technical standards today. It ran Windows 10 Pro and had no other tasks. Music was fed via 7 external HDD, I did it hard drive by hard drive and had to give up after the 4th hard drive at around 1.4 million tracks because the RAM was used up in the Core’s startup phase. Startup time and scanning the hard drives took about 30 minutes. Fluid work was no longer possible. The response became worse to unacceptable from hard disk to hard disk. The music was well sorted by artist. Hard disk 1 with the letters A,B,C Hard disk 2 with the letters D,E,F,G…Sampler on own hard disk sorted by decades. That was certainly a help for Roon.

Now I’m trying to get to the finish line via Linux Manjaro on current hardware XMG 16 x AMD Ryzen 7 4800H with Radeon Graphics with 64 GB RAM. There is also an RTX 2060 Refresh and 2 x 2 TB NVMe SSD installed. Currently, even 2 x 8 TB NVMe SSD would be possible. However, the prices will continue to drop until it is active to convert the 7 USB HDD. There are almost 2 million titles read in today and 28.4 GB RAM in use. The Core sleeps with me at night and is there in 7 minutes after power on. It scans for a few more minutes and then gets to work identifying the remaining 700,000 or so titles. In any case, it has become clear to me that powerful processors, fast SSD, sufficient and fast RAM bring significant progress.

I’m surprised at how responsive and powerful the Core has become with Beta 842, but that performance is still not stable with intensive use. However, with a startup time of 7 minutes, I would also restart several times a day, because many hours just on the PC would be unhealthy not only for Roon, but also for me.

That makes sense. It would be nice if there was a chart in the Roon docs that provides RAM recommendations for libraries of various sizes. The cost difference is relatively small: $72 for 16 GB vs. $160 for 32 GB. I can’t think of a time in my life when I regretted spending a bit more for extra memory.

I would recommend running to verify the memory before trusting it. I did have a bad SO-DIMM (different brand than what I’ve linked above) that caused library Roon corruption. I was able to use MemTest86 to identify the bad module and have it replaced. Would have saved myself a lot of time by running it first! It takes several hours with 16 GB, so probably the better part of a day with 32.

Edit: US Amazon prices corrected

1 Like

The reworked Roon Core and Remote specification recommendations gives some hints but as users are free to install Roon Server on their own computers alongside there own software and Roon as product constantly in development, I guess it’s hard to give precise figures.

For very large libraries:

And while for larger libraries (100k+ Tracks) a Nucleus+ is under the recommendations, for the largest libraries (250k+ tracks) … read the quote above. So even with upgraded RAM the Nucleus+ of the OP may be insufficient.

Note: I believe that with streaming services activated, a lot of additional data related to tracks/albums/search results currently not in ones library needs to be retrieved and stored somewhere, the RAM. So I would tend to go for 64GB of RAM for a library that size and streaming services enabled - just to be on the save side.


Good points, but unless I’m mistaken, the hardware used for the Nucleus+ is limited to 32 GB. 64 GB is not an option without building a new system to run Core. I think for around $160, it’s worth a try.

1 Like

Random thought, assuming an average of eleven tracks per album, a library of 500k tracks on CD would weigh about 1,600 lbs (without the jewel cases and liner notes). Ooof.

1 Like

It is clear that NUC or Nucleus are special music servers. It is also clear that Rock is a special Linux for Roon needs. However, I don’t need winter tires in the hot Sahara and am I really not always in the arctic region with my music?

What but genuine failure should seriously dissuade me from abandoning my XMG Manjaro beginner’s attempt? I only used this as a music server, have a bit more Linux standard, also a Windows…

Traveling to any DSL corner of the globe with a built-in screen, movable USB DAC, headphones, Windows plus Linux and more is more flexible, so if I don’t want to listen to music with it anymore, there are plenty of uses left. I don’t experience any thermal problems either. I’m right between Sahara and permafrost and don’t move in these regions even with my large database.

thanks for everyone’s input on this, I’ll probably install 2 new 16gb sticks into my Nucleus+, it sounds like we need a Nucleus+++ for large libraries.


I wouldn’t even consider running a NUC or Laptop for larger libraries. They will always be crippled by processors with low temperature & power consumption demands.
To me, that would be anything over 100K tracks.

“Not recommended” doesn’t mean that it doesn’t work. It can work but sometimes it may need some tweaking to work sufficiently and/or reliably.
“Tweaking” usually isn’t something a company can recommend (overwhelms customers; support burden; may not work in every possible case).

1 Like

I understand that well. Roon can’t test or sell every piece of hardware in the world itself. The way to rely on Nucleus is smarter. But I think it’s great that there is an open path across all operating systems and hundreds of manufacturers, and that tinkering projects are running as well.

1 Like

Some of my library is within Tidal favourites, perhaps 50K tracks and about 400K+ of my own digital files

1 Like

Today there are different modes (full power - balanced - low power consumption). When I was still using XP, my notebook was once pushed to the temperature limit. Today the processors are so frugal and powerful, it all stays in single digits with Roon and even the fan is not needed. Fast audio analysis with all cores could change something there, but I only need that for the current track, which is analyzed with one core in fractions of a second. Gamers and other special users naturally have other requirements.

7 minutes to startup is great, Roon is now so erratic crashing and sometimes unavailable for 2 or 3 days while indexing

Yes, i know there are “gaming/workstation laptops” but even yours has got a “mobile” class CPU. 45W nominal Thermal Displacement Power, whereas my simple Intel Core i5-11400 is labelled 65W nominal TDP. It easily consumes more than 120W electrically when analysing files though, way more than my passive cooling solution allows! :slight_smile:

And another reason for a dedicated core with a library your size is ofcourse relieving the core from the task of reindexing the library on each restart. Which means availability to play music, rather than waiting for the core to start up.

On the other hand, you know all of this and the compromises you choose are not the same as mine. Still a bit perplexed over the desire to maintain a library of over 300K tracks though! :wink:

…and the great thing for me, I learned that it takes much less time to build a Manjaro, clone it and put it in the closet. If necessary, build it again and put it in the cabinet as a second slightly different solution.

Windows is much more time consuming, but I will not give it up and test both equally. First comes Windows 10 or 11 and then Manjaro in dualboot on the SSD.

Apple currently has a harder time scoring points with me. An older device is still lying around for testing and tinkering. Old hardware is abandoned too quickly here. My MacBook Pro was also faster with Manjaro and SSD. The installation and removal is so quick and a change is possible at any time. But here my interest is initially collapsed, because the music service is also not what I need. Qobuz and Tidal rather keep the good sound and Spotify recommends dreamlike. The new approach is Roon and that after each restart without long waiting and tinkering possibility.

1 Like

Are you trying to drive the audio analysis to maximum?

I always shutdwon at night without waiting on day. The body care and much more without music takes longer than 10 minutes.

At Roon I don’t care about Tags, maybe a few complementary images right when listening…

For database maintenance I advise familiarization with Foobar2000, Mp3Tag…, knowledge of spreadsheet for mass processing…


You can’t go wrong with that upgrade. I haven’t verified your crash is due to memory, but that much music is a lot of metadata, and you could easily use 16GB. Go 32GB to be safe. If you have 50k albums, the cost investment into 32GB is tiny compared to your investment in the music.

I would advise trying ASAP.


Yes! The server in question is a fresh build, and i wanted to force it into temperature caused shutdown, to make sure it was functional.
(It was, the motherboard shut down at CPU Case temperature of 95°)
And after some further tests, i have come to a well behaved, cool solution with lot’s of power and resources upon request.