Roon user for several years, and now local library is heading toward 200,000 tracks, half of them HD. Server has been i5-8400, 16 GB memory, 4TB SSD for Win 11 and database, 10 GB internal HDD holds the tracks. All-wired network.
I have available a MiniPC - i7-11700, 32 GB memory, 1TB SSD, Win 11.
Want to do inexpensive upgrade that will best improve Roon performance,
Option 1 - Stay with i5, upgrade to 32 GB memory
Option 2 - Go to i7, swap in 4TB SSD from the i5. Purchase large external USB HDD for tracks.
Either option will set me back approx $300.
Performance wise, which option is best? Does enhanced i7 performance outweigh slower read write of external HDD?
Or am I just tilting at windmills?
Would appreciate the views of the more informed users with larger libraries
I would upgrade the i5 to 32GB and purchase a large USB drive for the i7. You would not notice any slow down reading music files from the USB drive. Use both servers and switch back and forth to see if you prefer one over the other. You can do that with one Roon subscription. There is nothing wrong with having two servers.
As your library increases you will need both CPU speed and more RAM. However, RAM increases are probably lesser on the list, with 16 GB you are probably good for another 50 to 100k or so. So, I’d move to the i7.
Some notes.
External USB HDD drives are more than fast enough for music storage and playback. SSD is way way overkill for music storage. External USB HDDs are wicked cheap actually, you can get a 14tb WD for under 200.
OR, you could get a USB Hard Drive Enclosure and just move your 10 GB drive into that and plug it up.
Although I would caution you to have a completely separate copy of your music files before doing anything, if you don’t already.
Exactly what @Rugby says, so I won’t repeat, other than saying that USB drives have advantages over internal.
- you can use it for Roon database backups
- easier to migrate music by connecting directly to a PC–Samba is pretty slow
- checking disc integrity is easy as you can hook up to a PC
Why do you want to change ? Is it underperforming as it is ?
I ran Roon with no problems for many years on an i7 - 7700, 16 Gb RAM, with 2 x 4 Tb HDD in a desktop with around 180k tracks
Upgrading to i7 may help, the i5 is getting a bit old but the difference may be marginal, I suppose the replacement would be modern spec i7- 12 or 13 so it may well be a significant update.
Having a single 10 Gb disc inside or out wouldn’t make much difference, the data transfer for music is trivial for a PC of that spec anyway even with HR tracks
If it a performance issue have you tried a daily/weekly restart of the Roon Server software ?
I cleaned out a load of duplicates and dropped my library to 120k, it runs happily on a NUC 10i7 with 32 Gb RAM and an internal 4Tb SSD , just another option
The newer CPU’s single thread performance is about 30% better than the i5, but it has more cores, which probably wouldn’t be utilized.
Given that up to 100k tracks can run on 4 GB (what the Nucleus One is equipped with), 32 GB is simply overkill for a Roon server except in edge cases.
But you make a valid point. If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. And, when the time comes to replace, there are likely to be other options.
I worked on RAM is cheap you cant overdo it, overkill maybe but even if its not used i feel comfy 
I appreciate everyone’s helpful comments. In response to some of the replies/questions:
- Am I having performance issues? Well, here’s a link to my biggest issue at this time- I/O failure adding local music files [Ticket In] . I did not mention this earlier, as I don’t want to create one of those topics that wander off into nowhere. Of course, I do wonder if a reinstall will end up being necessary to solve this problem. But, let’s not go there in this thread - I was asked, so I am telling you.
- Due to adding some updated NAS capability, I have a little more equipment than I need (the two computers that I described in the original post, and it so happens that I have a spare SSD drive).
- When I look at the “official” Roon Hardware Specification page for libraries over 100k tracks, they recommend running Roon on an i7 or i9 Core - so that’s part of the reason for my original post. Further, as I said I am coming near 200k tracks and will head toward 250k - and that same Specification page “strongly recommends that you engage with the user community” for a library that big. So here I am - engaging.
- Sooner of later I will have to get off of the i5. With the input I’ve received here (including buying a USB enclosure and using existing drive), I realize I could move to the i7 for well under $100 - but is there a significant performance boost? Because there is clearly a PITA factor in the effort to do this
- If I could get a similar boost by staying on the i5 and just adding a 16GB memory stick, I remove the PITA factor. Based on replies to date, I don’t think this is worth doing
- So I will either make the move to the i7 or do nothing. All of your responses are valuable in making that decision
You are all much appreciated
I can only say what I would do in your situation, with the hardware at your disposal. So, as previously said, doubling up on memory is almost certainly not going to bear fruit. Therefore, I’d build a new Roon server on the i7, but start off by running this on a clean database instead of restoring a backup. I’d do this to see if the performance issues have gone and are potentially linked to the current database rather than hardware*.
*I found that starting afresh, whilst loosing play history, tags etc. in Roon, solved the issues I was experiencing. Since I use Last.fm, and apply Roon tags to my media files, this wasn't a huge problem for me. As requested, I'm not going to go into any more detail.