Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) vs Whatsminer M30S+
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) | Specification | Whatsminer M30S+ |
|---|---|---|
| 13.5 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 100.0 TH/s |
| 1,310 W | Consommation électrique | 3,400 W |
| 97.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 34.0 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 4.2 kg | Weight | 11.5 kg |
| 4,470 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 11,601 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 36/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th)
Whatsminer M30S+
Based on BTC price of $63,866 and current network difficulty as of Jun 4, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Whatsminer M30S+ edges it: 5 of 6 factors go its way (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 641% more hashrate (13.5 vs 100.0 TH/s) in the Whatsminer M30S+'s favour. The Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) holds the edge in consommation électrique. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) and Whatsminer M30S+ actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Whatsminer M30S+ 641% more hashrate (13.5 vs 100.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) 61% better power draw (1,310 vs 3,400 W)
- Whatsminer M30S+ 65% better efficacité (97.0 vs 34.0 J/TH)
- Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) 63% better weight (4.2 vs 11.5 kg)
- Whatsminer M30S+ 160% more heat output (4,470 vs 11,601 BTU/hr)
- Whatsminer M30S+ 16% more score de minage domestique (31.0 vs 36.0)
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 S9k (13.5Th) | Metric | Whatsminer M30S+ |
|---|---|---|
| $600 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $1,800 |
| -$2.75 | Daily net profit | -$5.27 |
| -$1,605 | Net after 1 year | -$3,724 |
| -$2,610 | Net after 2 years | -$5,648 |
| -$3,616 | Net after 3 years | -$7,571 |
| 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
Whatsminer M30S+Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Whatsminer M30S+34.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) vs Whatsminer M30S+: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) is more profitable at $-2.75/day compared to $-5.27/day for the Whatsminer M30S+. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) or Whatsminer M30S+?
The Whatsminer M30S+ is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) or Whatsminer M30S+?
The Whatsminer M30S+ scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th)). 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 S9k (13.5Th) and Whatsminer M30S+?
The Bitmain Antminer S9k (13.5Th) runs at 97.0 J/TH while the Whatsminer M30S+ runs at 34.0 J/TH — a difference of 63.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 65% better efficacité (97.0 vs 34.0 J/TH).