Goldshell AE-BOX II vs Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE-BOX II | Specification | Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus |
|---|---|---|
| 54.0 MH/s | Taux de hachage | 1.0 TH/s |
| 530 W | Consommation électrique | 480 W |
| 9,814,814.8 J/TH | Efficiency | 480.0 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 3.0 kg | Weight | 2.2 kg |
| 1,808 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,638 BTU/hr |
| 65/100 | Home Mining Score | 34/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithme | Blake3 |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE-BOX II
Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus
Based on BTC price of $78,236 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 6 (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). Where it pulls away hardest is 100% better efficacité (9,814,815 vs 480 J/TH). That said, the Goldshell AE-BOX II isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins score de minage domestique and niveau sonore. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell AE-BOX II and Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus sit on each measurable spec:
- Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus 1851752% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.0 TH/s)
- Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus 9% better power draw (530 vs 480 W)
- Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus 100% better efficacité (9,814,815 vs 480 J/TH)
- Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus 25% better weight (3.0 vs 2.2 kg)
- Goldshell AE-BOX II 10% more heat output (1,808 vs 1,638 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE-BOX II 91% more score de minage domestique (65.0 vs 34.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
A miner pays for itself in profit, not specs. These projections track upfront cost against one, two and three years of net earnings at $0.10/kWh.
| Goldshell AE-BOX II | Metric | Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus |
|---|---|---|
| $120 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $129 |
| -$1.27 | Daily net profit | -$1.12 |
| -$584 | Net after 1 year | -$536 |
| -$1,049 | Net after 2 years | -$944 |
| -$1,513 | Net after 3 years | -$1,351 |
| Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) | Payback period | Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) |
Projections assume continuous operation, a flat $0.10/kWh rate, and no hardware degradation, pool fees, or BTC price change. Real-world ROI varies.
Best For...
Best for Profitability
TieBoth miners produce similar daily profit.
Best for Home Mining
Goldshell AE-BOX IIScore: 65/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus480.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Goldshell AE-BOX II or the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus is more profitable at $-1.12/day compared to $-1.27/day for the Goldshell AE-BOX II. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Goldshell AE-BOX II vs Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the Goldshell AE-BOX II or Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II scores 65/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 34/100 for the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Goldshell AE-BOX II and Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus on J/TH?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II runs at 9,814,814.8 J/TH while the Goldshell AL-BOX II Plus runs at 480.0 J/TH — a difference of 9,814,334.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficacité (9,814,815 vs 480 J/TH).