Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) vs Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) | Specification | Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 64.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 4.0 TH/s |
| 3,200 W | Consommation électrique | 1,027 W |
| 50.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 256.8 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 10,000.0 kg | Weight | 3,050.0 kg |
| 10,918 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 3,504 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 31/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th)
Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th)
Based on BTC price of $78,179 and current network difficulty as of May 17, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) edges it: 2 of 4 factors go its way (efficacité, hashrate). The standout gap is 1500% more hashrate (64.0 vs 4.0 TH/s) in the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th)'s favour. That said, the Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) 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
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) and Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) sit on each measurable spec:
- Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) 1500% more hashrate (64.0 vs 4.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) 68% better power draw (3,200 vs 1,027 W)
- Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) 81% better efficacité (50.0 vs 256.8 J/TH)
- Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) 70% better weight (10,000 vs 3,050 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) 212% more heat output (10,918 vs 3,504 BTU/hr)
- Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) 41% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 31.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) | Metric | Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $75 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$5.38 | Daily net profit | -$2.32 |
| -$2,038 | Net after 1 year | -$847 |
| -$4,001 | Net after 2 years | -$1,694 |
| -$5,963 | Net after 3 years | -$2,541 |
| 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
TieBoth miners produce similar daily profit.
Best for Home Mining
Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th)Score: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th)50.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) or the Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th)?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) is more profitable at $-2.32/day compared to $-5.38/day for the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) or the Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) vs Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th): which fits a residential setup better?
The Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) scores 31/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) vs Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th): how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Bitmain Antminer T17+ (64Th) runs at 50.0 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer V9 (4Th) runs at 256.8 J/TH — a difference of 206.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 81% better efficacité (50.0 vs 256.8 J/TH).