I’ve been trying to find the post to no avail (my search fu is failing me today ), but somewhen, sometime, there was a post which contained suggestions for when i3, i5, i7 would be appropriate compared to the collection size.
It has been my understanding, maybe incorrect, that when collections get to be extremely large, as 600k certainly is, that Roon’s server needs increase as well. Alternatively, I know one user who does have a collection in that neighborhood that uses an i5 laptop and is happy.
Well, the difference in scan times can be compelling but is also dependent on the I/O between core and music files. For your other point, it depends on your everyday use. For example, Roon uses 1 core per zone for DSP; so number of zones and expected DSP use becomes issues in deciding. Speaking of DSP, number of filters, upsampling, etc all can affect which is the correct CPU to use. Plus as a side point, Roon is still growing and in such situations, I always want (and would suggest) some headroom for future features.
As I understand it based on forum posts, I am suggesting that some users needs may not fit inside the parameters of what ROCK is trying to achieve. ROCK is not a replacement for Windows/MAC/LINUX’s RoonServer; it sits alongside them.
I think that when ROCK is officially out and the finalized approved hardware are detailed, that it would be a good idea to give the users guideposts for which hardware works best in different use cases (collection size, concurrent zones, DSP requirements) to help them make the decision.