I think you all have figured it out, but if you aren’t running on an SSD, you are feeling the pain. If you are on a spinning disk, upgrading to an SSD will have the greatest impact on your system performance. It’s by the biggest bang-for-the-buck you can get.
Roon runs fine on Windows 7.
Will Roon run on a spinning hard disk? Of course it will, but it won’t be a good experience. We do not recommend it.
Will Roon run on a Pentium or Celeron CPU? Of course it will, but it won’t be a good experience. We do not recommend it.
Will Roon run on 2GB of system RAM? Of course it will, but it won’t let you grow much in library size. We do not recommend it.
Will Roon run on a screen with 1024x768 resolution? Of course it will, but depending on taskbar location, you may not be able to run without going full screen. We do not recommend it.
Our minimum specs are exactly that: the minimum. It’s why we recommend a very different set of specs:
Tell me how we can make it more clear and I’ll do so.
You never stated what your system specs were nor your library size, total zone count, and whether you use DSP. My guess was that you didn’t have an SSD.
The i7 is great. The 16GB is surely overkill, but whatever. My guess is you got an SSD and that’s the critical improvement you are seeing.
Sounds like what you could do with is a lesson in manners. You come here shouting about how your little toy computer won’t run Roon, but now with a NUC it does. Why anyone took the time to reply to your belligerence and rudeness is beyond me.
While it may run fine on Windows 7, the OS has been completely deprecated and people should be encouraged to not use it any longer - for a litany of reasons not related to Roon.
You are incorrect. Spinning disks work fine in some circumstances, just like 1024x768 and Celerons. We have thousands of users on spinning disks. Is it ideal? Far from it… but it does work. We also have partners shipping devices with spinning disks, Celerons, etc, despite our recommendations.
My tone was not meant to be condescending. I apologize for making you feel that way.
I believe you are taking my disagreement with your assessment of the situation as a condescending tone. I am not trying to talk down to you. I was just explaining how I feel you are wrong about what “minimum requirements” are and that you have been unhelpful in providing information about your system to help locate the issue.
I’ve altered the text to stress that the recommended setup is actually a recommended minimum setup:
Just to agree here.
I read plenty of not-so-exact things in this thread.
I installed at first Roon Core on a (normal) hard disk, on a 10-years-old-or-so i3 Dell Server with 4GB of memory, an old Windows Server 2009 OS. It worked just fine with my 1000+ CD library.
So, clearly:
A. The hard disk was clearly not a problem,
B. the 4GB memory was clearly not a problem (actually the system, the software and the services never used more than 2.3GB of memory).
C. Performance was never a problem.
Since, I’ve upgraded the disk to a 256GB SSD, simply because I had a spare one and I privileged a long-term solution. But I have no plans on upgrading memory or processor (the i3-2100) until the server dies.
I suspect that people have performance problems because they use the computer resources through other programs and services, but not simply with Roon Core.
