Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell KA BOX Pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Specification | Goldshell KA BOX Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 44.0 MH/s | Taux de hachage | 1.6 TH/s |
| 460 W | Consommation électrique | 600 W |
| 10,454,545.5 J/TH | Efficiency | 375.0 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Niveau de bruit | 55 dB |
| 2.6 kg | Weight | 2.6 kg |
| 1,570 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 2,047 BTU/hr |
| 69/100 | Home Mining Score | 58/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithme | KHeavyHash |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh
Goldshell KA BOX Pro
Based on BTC price of $78,244 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Goldshell KA BOX Pro comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 6 (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). Where it pulls away hardest is 3636264% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.6 TH/s). The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh holds the edge in consommation électrique and score de minage domestique and niveau sonore. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh and Goldshell KA BOX Pro sit on each measurable spec:
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 3636264% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.6 TH/s)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 23% better power draw (460 vs 600 W)
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 100% better efficacité (10,454,545 vs 375 J/TH)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 36% better noise (35.0 vs 55.0 dB)
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 30% more heat output (1,570 vs 2,047 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 19% more score de minage domestique (69.0 vs 58.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Sticker price versus what the miner actually earns back: the table below projects cumulative net profit at a $0.10/kWh electricity rate.
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Metric | Goldshell KA BOX Pro |
|---|---|---|
| $120 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $129 |
| -$1.10 | Daily net profit | -$1.38 |
| -$523 | Net after 1 year | -$634 |
| -$926 | Net after 2 years | -$1,138 |
| -$1,329 | Net after 3 years | -$1,643 |
| 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 KA BOX Pro375.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh or the Goldshell KA BOX Pro?
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 $-1.38/day for the Goldshell KA BOX Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh or Goldshell KA BOX Pro?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Goldshell KA BOX Pro at 55 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh or the Goldshell KA BOX Pro?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh scores 69/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 58/100 for the Goldshell KA BOX Pro). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell KA BOX Pro: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh runs at 10,454,545.5 J/TH while the Goldshell KA BOX Pro runs at 375.0 J/TH — a difference of 10,454,170.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficacité (10,454,545 vs 375 J/TH).