Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) vs Antminer E9 Pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) | Specification | Antminer E9 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 1,770.0 GH/s | Taux de hachage | 3,680.0 MH/s |
| 2,839 W | Consommation électrique | 2,200 W |
| 1,604.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 597,826.1 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 16.1 kg | Weight | 14.2 kg |
| 9,687 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 7,506 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 40/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| X11 | Algorithme | EtHash |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh)
Antminer E9 Pro
Based on BTC price of $78,230 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh), which leads on 3 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). Its biggest concrete edge: 47998% more hashrate (1.8 vs 0.0 TH/s). The Antminer E9 Pro holds the edge in consommation électrique and score de minage domestique and niveau sonore. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
The Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) and Antminer E9 Pro diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 47998% more hashrate (1.8 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 23% better power draw (2,839 vs 2,200 W)
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 100% better efficacité (1,604 vs 597,826 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 12% better weight (16.1 vs 14.2 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) 29% more heat output (9,687 vs 7,506 BTU/hr)
- Antminer E9 Pro 82% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 40.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) | Metric | Antminer E9 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| $1,030 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $3,000 |
| -$6.75 | Daily net profit | -$5.28 |
| -$3,494 | Net after 1 year | -$4,927 |
| -$5,957 | Net after 2 years | -$6,854 |
| -$8,421 | Net after 3 years | -$8,781 |
| 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 E9 ProScore: 40/100. 75 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 D9 (1770Gh) or Antminer E9 Pro more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Antminer E9 Pro is more profitable at $-5.28/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.
Is the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) or the Antminer E9 Pro better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) vs Antminer E9 Pro: which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer E9 Pro scores 40/100 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 D9 (1770Gh) and Antminer E9 Pro on J/TH?
The Bitmain Antminer D9 (1770Gh) runs at 1,604.0 J/TH while the Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH — a difference of 596,222.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficacité (1,604 vs 597,826 J/TH).