Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M72
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) | Specification | MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 |
|---|---|---|
| 95.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 262.0 TH/s |
| 3,250 W | Consommation électrique | 3,799 W |
| 34.2 J/TH | Efficiency | 14.5 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 14,500.0 kg | Weight | 25.5 kg |
| 11,089 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 12,962 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th)
MicroBT WhatsMiner M72
Based on BTC price of $78,179 and current network difficulty as of May 17, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 l'emporte sur 4 des 5 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Where it pulls away hardest is 176% more hashrate (95.0 vs 262.0 TH/s). The Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) holds the edge in consommation électrique. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
The Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) and MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 176% more hashrate (95.0 vs 262.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) 14% better power draw (3,250 vs 3,799 W)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 58% better efficacité (34.2 vs 14.5 J/TH)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 100% better weight (14,500.0 vs 25.5 kg)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 17% more heat output (11,089 vs 12,962 BTU/hr)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 36% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 30.0)
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 S19 (95Th) | Metric | MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 |
|---|---|---|
| $215 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$4.38 | Daily net profit | $0.31 |
| -$1,815 | Net after 1 year | +$113 |
| -$3,414 | Net after 2 years | +$225 |
| -$5,014 | Net after 3 years | +$338 |
| Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) | Payback period | — |
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
MicroBT WhatsMiner M72$4.69/day higher profit at current rates.
Best for Home Mining
MicroBT WhatsMiner M72Score: 30/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
MicroBT WhatsMiner M7214.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M72: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 is more profitable at $0.31/day compared to $-4.38/day for the Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) or MicroBT WhatsMiner M72?
The MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) or MicroBT WhatsMiner M72?
The MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 scores 30/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M72: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Bitmain Antminer S19 (95Th) runs at 34.2 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 runs at 14.5 J/TH — a difference of 19.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 58% better efficacité (34.2 vs 14.5 J/TH).