Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M73
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) | Specification | MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 |
|---|---|---|
| 14.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 512.0 TH/s |
| 1,372 W | Consommation électrique | 7,424 W |
| 98.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 14.5 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 4,200.0 kg | Weight | 27.5 kg |
| 4,681 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 25,331 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th)
MicroBT WhatsMiner M73
Based on BTC price of $78,190 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 l'emporte sur 3 des 5 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, niveau sonore). Where it pulls away hardest is 3557% more hashrate (14.0 vs 512.0 TH/s). That said, the Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins consommation électrique and score de minage domestique. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
The Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) and MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 3557% more hashrate (14.0 vs 512.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) 82% better power draw (1,372 vs 7,424 W)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 85% better efficacité (98.0 vs 14.5 J/TH)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 99% better weight (4,200.0 vs 27.5 kg)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 441% more heat output (4,681 vs 25,331 BTU/hr)
- Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) 3% more score de minage domestique (31.0 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 S9 (14Th) | Metric | MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 |
|---|---|---|
| $65 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$2.79 | Daily net profit | $0.61 |
| -$1,083 | Net after 1 year | +$221 |
| -$2,101 | Net after 2 years | +$442 |
| -$3,119 | Net after 3 years | +$663 |
| 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 M73$3.39/day higher profit at current rates.
Best for Home Mining
Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th)Score: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
MicroBT WhatsMiner M7314.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M73: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 is more profitable at $0.61/day compared to $-2.79/day for the Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) or the MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) 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 S9 (14Th) or the MicroBT WhatsMiner M73?
The Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) scores 31/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the MicroBT WhatsMiner M73). 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 S9 (14Th) and MicroBT WhatsMiner M73?
The Bitmain Antminer S9 (14Th) runs at 98.0 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M73 runs at 14.5 J/TH — a difference of 83.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 85% better efficacité (98.0 vs 14.5 J/TH).