Roon ROCK on NUC10i7FNH -- 8 mins to start?

Have a newly set up NUC10i7FNH (with 500gb SSD, 32gb RAM, 4tb internal SSD storage). I have 250k tracks. It takes 8 mins for the core to start up (reboot just a few seconds, then wait for 8 mins for clients to show home page).

Is this ok???

Hi @miguelito

I am using a NUC10i3 with a Samsung 970 Evo Pus 250GB NVMe drive and an internal Samsung 860 1TB SSD for music. I only have 20,700 tracks and it takes about 1 minute 40 for it to boot up and Roon to become active.

8 minutes sounds a long time but you have a lot of tracks.

Yes for the size of your library it’s expected mine take a good 3-4 mins with 78k tracks and no nvme drive. It does lots of pre checks to database etc before starting up . The idea of rock is its always on so this is only a thing when updating.

Has it finished analysing all your tracks?

I have about 170k tracks and a restart of Roon Server after an update probably takes around 3-4 mins. I have never timed it though. ROCK is on 24/7 so this is not an issue.

Client comes back up before ROCK has finished re-scanning all the drives (one internal and two USB) as I can see it finishing off the scan for about a minute once back.

What is the performance of your system like otherwise? I recall you were having major delay issues with playback and search?

EDIT: Some hardware context, my NUC is a 7i7 16GB RAM and 5 years old. NUC has a standard SSD for boot drive and most tracks are external on USB drives.

1 Like

I have exactly that same set up , created a few months back.

Copying files to the NUC across the network was slow ( I copied 3Tb) then I restored a Back up which seemed to negate the analysis step;

The setup is now around 2 months running and it starts in maybe 90 seconds so 8 mins sounds long. Library analysis is one option . The other option is the M.2 drive is it seated properly , a “wiggle” may improve the connection ?

I restart daily from unplugged power. I just restarted the NUC/ROCK and the Home page came up in 90 seconds with a 170k track library

The on off is a bit iffy until you get the hang. From cold you need to just press “gently” the on off switch, the same for an “Orderly” shut down . Do not do a LONG press as this forces a reboot of some sort and is not recommended unless it hangs.

He restored his database analysis should not be happening at my system it’s been slow like this since Roon changed the start up behaviour but I don’t have an m.2 just a plain old ssd. Are you ROCK these days I thought you were windows?

If it takes Tony 3-4 mins for 170k then 7-8 for 250k seems about right to me. I am sure it all depends on hardware, what the makeup of your library is etc.

Yes I was Win10 but I updated a few months back, I have exactly the set up quoted now

10i7./ 32 Gb RAM /256 Gb M.2 and a 4Tb SSD for files

According To the Home page I have 129012 tracks ( I weeded a bit not 170k oops !), my startup from On/Off to ready to play was 90 seconds (just timed). I assume there is a database load to memory time involved. 250k is double mine , so maybe 8 mins is valid . It does seem long but then most users keep the NUC on 24/7 and never see it. I switch on then brew Tea :rofl: so I don’t see it.

My only quirk is I shutdown nightly due to weather conditions (Lightening) or our Power Utilities “Loadshedding” that “clears” the RAM

I restored my db and no, there’s no analysis going on. Reason I ask is that with the same files and db, my 2012 mac mini started in maybe 1/2 the time. The same SSD was used for files but over USB3, and the internal SSD on that mini is prob 1/3 the speed, not to mention there’s a lot more OS loading. For completeness the mini runs Catalina and has 16gb of RAM.

Having said this the performance of Roon on the NUC during normal use is much better than the mini right now.

For what it’s worth… 20 seconds total…115,000 tracks…including reboot of server and ROON.
Running ROCK on an older NUCi7. No rescan of library, which resides on USB 4TB external drive. A library rescan does take around the 8 minutes you mentioned, but I only initiate that after adding files or a software update.

It really feels like Roon is reverifying something in my library, like checking every file is truly there or something of this sort.

I have a similar setup: NUC10i7, 2’8Gb DDR4 RAM, 250Gb Samsung 970 Evo Plus m.2 NVMe and a 4Tb Samsung 960 QVO SSD on SATA + 4Tb WD Portable on USB.
Around 130K tracks, lots of high rez and DSD.
It’s all built into a Streacom FC Alpha fanless chassi.

I think a full start up takes around 5-6minutes but i’ll check tomorrow.

Edit: I stopped it properly and the powered up again. My timer claimed that the Roon Endpoint on iPad had full control again after 2:55 seconds. (the Web GUI reloaded after ca 25-35 seconds)

1 Like

NUC10i7 with 16 Byte, appr. 340.000 tracks stored on a NAS QNAP TVS-671, NAS and NUC attached to GBit Ethernet, less than 4 min to start

How many streaming tracks?

very few (less than 500 I guess)

Interesting. I have been wondering if the long startups have to do with checking track availability with streaming services. I have probably 100k tracks with TIDAL and Qobuz.

As I noted before, the normal usage Roon performance of the NUC10i7 is way better than my i7 mac mini from 2012.

Also to your point on the NAS, when I copied all my albums from my main store to the NUC over the network I got a throughput of about 110MB/sec, which is pretty good and essentially at the top of what you can get with gig ethernet.

I have yet to see a music service or player that doesn’t run into significant performance issues when the number of linked streaming tracks runs into such a large number. Local libraries offer more performance.

Not to beat a dead horse… But Audirvana or Qobuz or TIDAL native apps have no such issues.

Also, I timed it more carefully and startup is 7mins.

1 Like

I have identical setup. Initial startup possibly took about 5 minutes, but I have left it powered up since with no delay issues of any sort.

Probably neither load anything into memory at start up.

AFAIK Roon loads the db into memory at start up to make its navigation quicker. Certainly looking at my Windows Task Manager Roon took up 3-4 GB of RAM, JRiver for example took up 0.25 Gb

hence the bigger the library the longer it takes , I THINK …

1 Like

With the latest build I just installed 1.8/943, Roon Core on the NUC was up and running in 2 minutes flat.