Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) vs Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) | Specification | Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) |
|---|---|---|
| 15.0 GH/s | Taux de hachage | 1,770.0 GH/s |
| 1,200 W | Consommation électrique | 2,839 W |
| 80,000.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 1,604.0 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 5,500.0 kg | Weight | 16.1 kg |
| 4,094 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 9,687 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 22/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| X11 | Algorithme | X11 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh)
Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)
Based on BTC price of $78,226 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) l'emporte sur 2 des 4 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate). Its biggest concrete edge: 11700% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.8 TH/s). That said, the Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins consommation électrique and score de minage domestique. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
The Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) and Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 11700% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.8 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) 58% better power draw (1,200 vs 2,839 W)
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 98% better efficacité (80,000 vs 1,604 J/TH)
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 100% better weight (5,500.0 vs 16.1 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 137% more heat output (4,094 vs 9,687 BTU/hr)
- Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) 41% more score de minage domestique (31.0 vs 22.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) | Metric | Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $1,030 |
| -$2.88 | Daily net profit | -$6.75 |
| -$1,051 | Net after 1 year | -$3,494 |
| -$2,102 | Net after 2 years | -$5,957 |
| -$3,153 | Net after 3 years | -$8,421 |
| — | 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
Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh)Score: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)1,604.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) or Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) is more profitable at $-2.88/day compared to $-6.75/day for the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) vs Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh): which runs at a lower noise level?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) or the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)?
The Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) scores 31/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) and Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) on J/TH?
The Bitmain Antminer D3 (15Gh) runs at 80,000.0 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) runs at 1,604.0 J/TH — a difference of 78,396.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 98% better efficacité (80,000 vs 1,604 J/TH).