Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) vs Antminer KS3
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) | Specification | Antminer KS3 |
|---|---|---|
| 166.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 9.4 TH/s |
| 3,154 W | Consommation électrique | 3,500 W |
| 19.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 372.3 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 16,100.0 kg | Weight | 16.1 kg |
| 10,761 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 11,942 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 36/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Blake2s | Algorithme | KHeavyHash |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)
Antminer KS3
Based on BTC price of $77,040 and current network difficulty as of May 18, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th), which leads on 4 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 95% better efficacité (19.0 vs 372.3 J/TH) in the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)'s favour. The Antminer KS3 claws back ground on 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 Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) and Antminer KS3 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 1666% more hashrate (166.0 vs 9.4 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 10% better power draw (3,154 vs 3,500 W)
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 95% better efficacité (19.0 vs 372.3 J/TH)
- Antminer KS3 100% better weight (16,100.0 vs 16.1 kg)
- Antminer KS3 11% more heat output (10,761 vs 11,942 BTU/hr)
- Antminer KS3 64% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 36.0)
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 KA3 (166Th) | Metric | Antminer KS3 |
|---|---|---|
| $1,399 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $8,000 |
| -$1.68 | Daily net profit | -$8.07 |
| -$2,014 | Net after 1 year | -$10,944 |
| -$2,629 | Net after 2 years | -$13,889 |
| -$3,244 | Net after 3 years | -$16,833 |
| 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 KS3Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)19.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) vs Antminer KS3: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) is more profitable at $-1.68/day compared to $-8.07/day for the Antminer KS3. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) vs Antminer KS3: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Antminer KS3 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) vs Antminer KS3: which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer KS3 scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)). 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 KA3 (166Th) and Antminer KS3?
The Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) runs at 19.0 J/TH while the Antminer KS3 runs at 372.3 J/TH — a difference of 353.3 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 95% better efficacité (19.0 vs 372.3 J/TH).