Antminer Slim Edition (S9) vs Whatsminer M63S+
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer Slim Edition (S9) | Specification | Whatsminer M63S+ |
|---|---|---|
| 12.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 450.0 TH/s |
| 1,100 W | Consommation électrique | 7,650 W |
| 91.7 J/TH | Efficiency | 17.0 J/TH |
| 65 dB | Niveau de bruit | 50 dB |
| 3.5 kg | Weight | 27.5 kg |
| 3,753 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 26,102 BTU/hr |
| 52/100 | Home Mining Score | 44/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| D-Central | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer Slim Edition (S9)
Whatsminer M63S+
Based on BTC price of $77,831 and current network difficulty as of May 17, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Whatsminer M63S+, which leads on 3 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, niveau sonore). Its biggest concrete edge: 3650% more hashrate (12.0 vs 450.0 TH/s). The Antminer Slim Edition (S9) claws back ground on consommation électrique and score de minage domestique and rapport qualité-prix. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) and Whatsminer M63S+ sit on each measurable spec:
- Whatsminer M63S+ 3650% more hashrate (12.0 vs 450.0 TH/s)
- Antminer Slim Edition (S9) 86% better power draw (1,100 vs 7,650 W)
- Whatsminer M63S+ 81% better efficacité (91.7 vs 17.0 J/TH)
- Whatsminer M63S+ 23% better noise (65.0 vs 50.0 dB)
- Antminer Slim Edition (S9) 87% better weight (3.5 vs 27.5 kg)
- Whatsminer M63S+ 595% more heat output (3,753 vs 26,102 BTU/hr)
- Antminer Slim Edition (S9) 18% more score de minage domestique (52.0 vs 44.0)
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.
| Antminer Slim Edition (S9) | Metric | Whatsminer M63S+ |
|---|---|---|
| $350 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $14,000 |
| -$2.21 | Daily net profit | -$2.24 |
| -$1,157 | Net after 1 year | -$14,819 |
| -$1,963 | Net after 2 years | -$15,637 |
| -$2,770 | Net after 3 years | -$16,456 |
| 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 Slim Edition (S9)Score: 52/100. 65 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Whatsminer M63S+17.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) or the Whatsminer M63S+?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) is more profitable at $-2.21/day compared to $-2.24/day for the Whatsminer M63S+. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) or Whatsminer M63S+?
The Whatsminer M63S+ is quieter at 50 dB compared to the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) at 65 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Antminer Slim Edition (S9) vs Whatsminer M63S+: which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer Slim Edition (S9) scores 52/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 44/100 for the Whatsminer M63S+). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Antminer Slim Edition (S9) and Whatsminer M63S+ on J/TH?
The Antminer Slim Edition (S9) runs at 91.7 J/TH while the Whatsminer M63S+ runs at 17.0 J/TH — a difference of 74.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 81% better efficacité (91.7 vs 17.0 J/TH).