Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell E-DG1M
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Specification | Goldshell E-DG1M |
|---|---|---|
| 44.0 MH/s | Taux de hachage | 3.4 GH/s |
| 460 W | Consommation électrique | 1,800 W |
| 10,454,545.5 J/TH | Efficiency | 529,411.8 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Niveau de bruit | 45 dB |
| 2.6 kg | Weight | 16.0 kg |
| 1,570 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 6,142 BTU/hr |
| 69/100 | Home Mining Score | 56/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithme | Scrypt |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh
Goldshell E-DG1M
Based on BTC price of $78,237 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Goldshell E-DG1M l'emporte sur 3 des 6 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 7627% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s) in the Goldshell E-DG1M's favour. The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh claws back ground on consommation électrique and 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
Here is every spec where the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh and Goldshell E-DG1M actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Goldshell E-DG1M 7627% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 74% better power draw (460 vs 1,800 W)
- Goldshell E-DG1M 95% better efficacité (10,454,545 vs 529,412 J/TH)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 22% better noise (35.0 vs 45.0 dB)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 84% better weight (2.6 vs 16.0 kg)
- Goldshell E-DG1M 291% more heat output (1,570 vs 6,142 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 23% more score de minage domestique (69.0 vs 56.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Hardware cost is only half the story — here is how each miner's upfront price plays out against cumulative profit at a $0.10/kWh rate.
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Metric | Goldshell E-DG1M |
|---|---|---|
| $120 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $799 |
| -$1.10 | Daily net profit | -$4.32 |
| -$523 | Net after 1 year | -$2,376 |
| -$926 | Net after 2 years | -$3,953 |
| -$1,329 | Net after 3 years | -$5,529 |
| 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 Pro 44MhScore: 69/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell E-DG1M529,411.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh or Goldshell E-DG1M more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh is more profitable at $-1.10/day compared to $-4.32/day for the Goldshell E-DG1M. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh or the Goldshell E-DG1M better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Goldshell E-DG1M at 45 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell E-DG1M: which fits a residential setup better?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh scores 69/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 56/100 for the Goldshell E-DG1M). 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 Pro 44Mh and Goldshell E-DG1M on J/TH?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh runs at 10,454,545.5 J/TH while the Goldshell E-DG1M runs at 529,411.8 J/TH — a difference of 9,925,133.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 95% better efficacité (10,454,545 vs 529,412 J/TH).