Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) vs Goldshell Byte
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) | Specification | Goldshell Byte |
|---|---|---|
| 2.0 GH/s | Taux de hachage | 5.5 MH/s |
| 3,580 W | Consommation électrique | 140 W |
| 1,790,000.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 25,454,545.5 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Niveau de bruit | 35 dB |
| 15.0 kg | Weight | 0.4 kg |
| 12,215 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 478 BTU/hr |
| 30/100 | Home Mining Score | 65/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithme | Zksnark |
| IceRiver | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s)
Goldshell Byte
Based on BTC price of $78,230 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) l'emporte sur 3 des 6 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 36264% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s) in the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s)'s favour. That said, the Goldshell Byte isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins 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
The Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) and Goldshell Byte diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) 36264% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Goldshell Byte 96% better power draw (3,580 vs 140 W)
- Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) 93% better efficacité (1,790,000 vs 25,454,545 J/TH)
- Goldshell Byte 53% better noise (75.0 vs 35.0 dB)
- Goldshell Byte 97% better weight (15.0 vs 0.4 kg)
- Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) 2457% more heat output (12,215 vs 478 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell Byte 117% more score de minage domestique (30.0 vs 65.0)
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.
| Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) | Metric | Goldshell Byte |
|---|---|---|
| $5,390 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $59 |
| -$8.59 | Daily net profit | -$0.34 |
| -$8,526 | Net after 1 year | -$182 |
| -$11,662 | Net after 2 years | -$304 |
| -$14,798 | Net after 3 years | -$427 |
| 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 ByteScore: 65/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s)1,790,000.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) or the Goldshell Byte?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell Byte is more profitable at $-0.34/day compared to $-8.59/day for the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) vs Goldshell Byte: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Goldshell Byte is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) or Goldshell Byte?
The Goldshell Byte scores 65/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s)). 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 Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) and Goldshell Byte?
The Iceriver ALEO AE3 (2Gh/s) runs at 1,790,000.0 J/TH while the Goldshell Byte runs at 25,454,545.5 J/TH — a difference of 23,664,545.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 93% better efficacité (1,790,000 vs 25,454,545 J/TH).