Antminer AL1 vs Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer AL1 | Specification | Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 16.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 10.5 TH/s |
| 3,360 W | Consommation électrique | 1,432 W |
| 210.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 136.4 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 14.5 kg | Weight | 4,200.0 kg |
| 11,464 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 4,886 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 31/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Blake3 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer AL1
Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th)
Based on BTC price of $75,788 and current network difficulty as of May 26, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficacité, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 57% better power draw (3,360 vs 1,432 W) in the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th)'s favour. That said, the Antminer AL1 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins hashrate and score de minage domestique and niveau sonore. Cross-check the spec deltas and operating-cost table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
The Antminer AL1 and Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Antminer AL1 52% more hashrate (16.0 vs 10.5 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) 57% better power draw (3,360 vs 1,432 W)
- Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) 35% better efficacité (210 vs 136 J/TH)
- Antminer AL1 100% better weight (14.5 vs 4,200.0 kg)
- Antminer AL1 135% more heat output (11,464 vs 4,886 BTU/hr)
- Antminer AL1 16% more score de minage domestique (36.0 vs 31.0)
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.
| Antminer AL1 | Metric | Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $10,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $955 |
| -$7.51 | Daily net profit | -$3.07 |
| -$12,740 | Net after 1 year | -$2,076 |
| -$15,479 | Net after 2 years | -$3,197 |
| -$18,219 | Net after 3 years | -$4,317 |
| 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
Antminer AL1Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th)136.4 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Antminer AL1 vs Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) is more profitable at $-3.07/day compared to $-7.51/day for the Antminer AL1. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Antminer AL1 or the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer AL1 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Antminer AL1 vs Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th): which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer AL1 scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Antminer AL1 vs Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th): how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Antminer AL1 runs at 210.0 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer T9+ (10.5Th) runs at 136.4 J/TH — a difference of 73.6 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 35% better efficacité (210 vs 136 J/TH).