Goldshell AE Max vs Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE Max | Specification | Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) |
|---|---|---|
| 360.0 MH/s | Taux de hachage | 360.0 GH/s |
| 3,300 W | Consommation électrique | 180 W |
| 9,166,666.7 J/TH | Efficiency | 500.0 J/TH |
| 55 dB | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 13.5 kg | Weight | 2.2 kg |
| 11,260 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 614 BTU/hr |
| 50/100 | Home Mining Score | 33/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithme | Blake3 |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE Max
Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)
Based on BTC price of $78,234 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh), which leads on 4 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 100% better efficacité (9,166,667 vs 500 J/TH) in the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)'s favour. The Goldshell AE Max claws back ground on 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 Max and Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) sit on each measurable spec:
- Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) 99900% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.4 TH/s)
- Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) 95% better power draw (3,300 vs 180 W)
- Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) 100% better efficacité (9,166,667 vs 500 J/TH)
- Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) 84% better weight (13.5 vs 2.2 kg)
- Goldshell AE Max 1733% more heat output (11,260 vs 614 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE Max 52% more score de minage domestique (50.0 vs 33.0)
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 Max | Metric | Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) |
|---|---|---|
| $870 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $340 |
| -$7.92 | Daily net profit | -$0.42 |
| -$3,761 | Net after 1 year | -$493 |
| -$6,652 | Net after 2 years | -$646 |
| -$9,542 | Net after 3 years | -$799 |
| 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 MaxScore: 50/100. 55 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)500.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Goldshell AE Max vs Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) is more profitable at $-0.42/day compared to $-7.92/day for the Goldshell AE Max. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Goldshell AE Max vs Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh): which runs at a lower noise level?
The Goldshell AE Max is quieter at 55 dB compared to the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Goldshell AE Max vs Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh): which fits a residential setup better?
The Goldshell AE Max scores 50/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 33/100 for the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
What is the efficiency difference between Goldshell AE Max and Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh)?
The Goldshell AE Max runs at 9,166,666.7 J/TH while the Goldshell AL BOX (360Gh) runs at 500.0 J/TH — a difference of 9,166,166.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficacité (9,166,667 vs 500 J/TH).