Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) vs Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) | Specification | Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| 8.3 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 400.0 GH/s |
| 3,188 W | Consommation électrique | 100 W |
| 384.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 250.0 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 35 dB |
| — | Weight | 2.5 kg |
| 10,878 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 341 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 71/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| KHeavyHash | Algorithme | KHeavyHash |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | IceRiver |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th)
Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra
Based on BTC price of $78,226 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra comes out ahead — it takes 5 of 6 (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore, rapport qualité-prix). Where it pulls away hardest is 97% better power draw (3,188 vs 100 W). That said, the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins hashrate. 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 Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) and Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra sit on each measurable spec:
- Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) 1975% more hashrate (8.3 vs 0.4 TH/s)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 97% better power draw (3,188 vs 100 W)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 35% better efficacité (384 vs 250 J/TH)
- Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) 3088% more heat output (10,878 vs 341 BTU/hr)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 223% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 71.0)
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 KS3 (8.3Th) | Metric | Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra |
|---|---|---|
| $3,850 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $77 |
| -$7.35 | Daily net profit | -$0.23 |
| -$6,534 | Net after 1 year | -$159 |
| -$9,217 | Net after 2 years | -$242 |
| -$11,901 | Net after 3 years | -$324 |
| 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
Iceriver KAS KS0 UltraScore: 71/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra250.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) or the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra is more profitable at $-0.23/day compared to $-7.35/day for the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) or the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) or the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra?
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra scores 71/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th)). 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 KS3 (8.3Th) and Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra?
The Bitmain Antminer KS3 (8.3Th) runs at 384.1 J/TH while the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra runs at 250.0 J/TH — a difference of 134.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 35% better efficacité (384 vs 250 J/TH).