Dedicated NUC/Nucleaus vs shared PC (w Fiber Media Converter connected to Endpoint)

Each component within streaming system has to be considered as entrance way for noise, jitter. This can be either self generated or passed from previous component in chain. Now you can isolate this noise via FMC from entering next component in chain, timing is another issue, can't restore timing lost in previous component or components.

Issue is each component in chain liable to this self generated noise and jitter. Lets say one has poor quality modem (just taking this as example as first component in chain from ISP) produces much self noise and jitter, signal integrity impacted,  heard as loss of resolution and some measure of digititus or fatigue. The problem is you CANNOT GAIN back what was lost from that first component, or any previous component in chain. The best you can do beyond the previous component is eliminate ANY MORE noise and jitter entering chain. This is why every component in chain is critical for optimized streaming.

Nope, that pc is noisy environment, you've lost both resolution and lost a great deal of timing/jitter with that solution, the FMC can't repair what was damaged in pc. Every component in chain critical to optimize streaming.

I differ from latik and ghdprentice in I believe NUC can be nice solution as server only, Roon core only on NUC, streaming out of NUC is issue, where separate streamer come into play. Streamer is where Roon Endpoint goes.

For one box solution you need top notch rendering within that single unit, this means Roon Core and Endpoint both in this single server/streamer. In that case my choices go towards Anitpodes K series, Aurender  W20 or N series. I've chosen to continue with diy route via recent addition of custom build server based on ATX motherboard (Windows or PC computer boards). With this I can choose to use as streamer or server via choice of different PCIe cards.  Optimized  via Euphony operating system and choice of Roon or Stylus Version 4 music player.

Going route of custom build can give one both versatility and possibility of optimizing many rendering protocols. Also, atx boards used in SOTA servers/streamers such as Taiko Extreme and Wadax. There are sources for professional builds as well as diy possibility. Much more bang for buck with these builds vs common off the shelf servers and/or steamers. These builds can range from SOTA to elementary.

@sgreg1 You can only control what you can control. Just as the electrical grid is not something I can control, so is ISP. Doesn't mean I can't realize full potential of what is offered via equipment upgrades within the home or audio system.

For those who believe a general service computer delivers sound quality on par with dedicated streaming components I'd suggest  doing direct comparisons in home. Both noise and jitter in digital components are easily heard. Contemporary digital far superior to early digital, due largely to massive efforts in reducing both. We are not at end game in these efforts, further reductions now has digital playing at or near level playing field with the best of best vinyl rigs. Lowering of noise floors and reducing jitter to ever more vanishing levels is totally responsible for providing digital with more analog like sound qualities.

For some, general service computers may be sufficient, but to state no better sound quality possible is total nonsense.

@truongv0ky The only optical conversion I've done post server included Sonore OpticalRendu which is optical streamer This replaced SOTM SMS 200 Neo ethernet streamer. Was it the streamer alone or combo of streamer and optical conversion that was responsible for improvement?  Presume mostly due to OpticalRendu as it has better clock than SOTM, lower noise floor of optical vs ethernet didn't hurt.

I did try optical conversion in front of server, prefer ethernet here.

Optical does provide 100% isolation, ethernet something less than total isolation. Issue is second fiber media converter injects it's own noise, cheap FMC have noisy power supply and pretty poor clocks. So, bottom line, implementation most important in optical vs ethernet solution.