Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) vs iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) | Specification | iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 1.1 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 1.8 TH/s |
| 1,580 W | Consommation électrique | 295 W |
| 1,398.2 J/TH | Efficiency | 163.9 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 6,100.0 kg | Weight | 2.2 kg |
| 5,391 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,007 BTU/hr |
| 28/100 | Home Mining Score | 34/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithme | Eaglesong |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | iBeLink |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh)
iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)
Based on BTC price of $77,900 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) l'emporte sur 5 des 5 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 88% better efficacité (1,398 vs 164 J/TH) in the iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)'s favour. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) and iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) 59% more hashrate (1.1 vs 1.8 TH/s)
- iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) 81% better power draw (1,580 vs 295 W)
- iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) 88% better efficacité (1,398 vs 164 J/TH)
- iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) 100% better weight (6,100.0 vs 2.2 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) 436% more heat output (5,391 vs 1,007 BTU/hr)
- iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) 21% more score de minage domestique (28.0 vs 34.0)
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 K5 (1130Gh) | Metric | iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $925 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $238 |
| -$3.75 | Daily net profit | -$0.64 |
| -$2,294 | Net after 1 year | -$473 |
| -$3,664 | Net after 2 years | -$708 |
| -$5,033 | Net after 3 years | -$943 |
| 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
iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)Score: 34/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)163.9 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) vs iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) is more profitable at $-0.64/day compared to $-3.75/day for the Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) or the iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) vs iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th): which fits a residential setup better?
The iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) scores 34/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 28/100 for the Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh)). 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 Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) and iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th)?
The Bitmain Antminer K5 (1130Gh) runs at 1,398.2 J/TH while the iBeLink N3 mini (1.8Th) runs at 163.9 J/TH — a difference of 1,234.3 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 88% better efficacité (1,398 vs 164 J/TH).