Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9
Antminer K7 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer K7 | Specification | Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 |
|---|---|---|
| 63.5 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 1,000.0 KH/s |
| 3,080 W | Consommation électrique | 2,472 W |
| 48.5 J/TH | Efficiency | 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Niveau de bruit | 76 dB |
| 14.0 kg | Weight | 17.5 kg |
| 10,509 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 8,435 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 33/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithme | Randomx |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer K7
Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9
Based on BTC price of $64,340 and current network difficulty as of Jun 4, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Antminer K7, which leads on 5 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore, rapport qualité-prix). Where it pulls away hardest is 6349999900% more hashrate (63.5 vs 0.0 TH/s). The Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 claws back ground on consommation électrique. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Antminer K7 and Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 sit on each measurable spec:
- Antminer K7 6349999900% more hashrate (63.5 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 20% better power draw (3,080 vs 2,472 W)
- Antminer K7 100% better efficacité (48.5 vs 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH)
- Antminer K7 1% better noise (75.0 vs 76.0 dB)
- Antminer K7 20% better weight (14.0 vs 17.5 kg)
- Antminer K7 25% more heat output (10,509 vs 8,435 BTU/hr)
- Antminer K7 9% more score de minage domestique (36.0 vs 33.0)
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 K7 | Metric | Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 |
|---|---|---|
| $3,500 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $5,449 |
| -$5.54 | Daily net profit | -$5.93 |
| -$5,523 | Net after 1 year | -$7,614 |
| -$7,547 | Net after 2 years | -$9,780 |
| -$9,570 | Net after 3 years | -$11,945 |
| 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 K7Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Antminer K748.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Antminer K7 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Antminer K7 is more profitable at $-5.54/day compared to $-5.93/day for the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Antminer K7 or the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer K7 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 at 76 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Antminer K7 or the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9?
The Antminer K7 scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 33/100 for the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Antminer K7 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Antminer K7 runs at 48.5 J/TH while the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 runs at 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH — a difference of 2,471,999,951.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficacité (48.5 vs 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH).