Passer au contenu

Nous améliorons nos opérations pour mieux vous servir. Les commandes sont expédiées normalement depuis Laval, QC. Questions? Contactez-nous

Bitcoin accepté au paiement  |  Expédié depuis Laval, QC, Canada  |  Soutien expert depuis 2016

Avalon A1346

Avalon A1346

Taux de hachage 110.0 TH/s Puissance 3,300 W Efficiency 30.0 J/TH
VS
Avalon A1466

Avalon A1466

Taux de hachage 150.0 TH/s Puissance 3,230 W Efficiency 21.5 J/TH

Avalon A1346 vs Avalon A1466

Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.

Specifications Comparison

Avalon A1346 Specification Avalon A1466
110.0 TH/s Taux de hachage 150.0 TH/s
3,300 W Consommation électrique 3,230 W
30.0 J/TH Efficiency 21.5 J/TH
75 dB Niveau de bruit 75 dB
12.3 kg Weight 12.8 kg
11,260 BTU/hr BTU Output 11,021 BTU/hr
36/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
Canaan Manufacturer Canaan

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Avalon A1346

Daily Revenue 0.00005062 BTC $3.96
Daily Electricity -$7.92
Daily Profit -$3.96
Monthly -$118.78
Yearly -$1,445.12

Avalon A1466

Daily Revenue 0.00006903 BTC $5.40
Daily Electricity -$7.75
Daily Profit -$2.35
Monthly -$70.53
Yearly -$858.10

Based on BTC price of $78,245 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Avalon A1466 comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 4 (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique). Its biggest concrete edge: 28% better efficacité (30.0 vs 21.5 J/TH). That said, the Avalon A1346 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins rapport qualité-prix. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: Avalon A1466 — l'emporte sur 3 des 4 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Avalon A1346 and Avalon A1466 sit on each measurable spec:

  • Avalon A1466 36% more hashrate (110 vs 150 TH/s)
  • Avalon A1466 2% better power draw (3,300 vs 3,230 W)
  • Avalon A1466 28% better efficacité (30.0 vs 21.5 J/TH)
  • Avalon A1346 4% better weight (12.3 vs 12.8 kg)
  • Avalon A1346 2% more heat output (11,260 vs 11,021 BTU/hr)

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.

Avalon A1346 Metric Avalon A1466
$2,800 Upfront cost (MSRP) $4,200
-$3.96 Daily net profit -$2.35
-$4,245 Net after 1 year -$5,058
-$5,690 Net after 2 years -$5,916
-$7,135 Net after 3 years -$6,774
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

Tie

Both miners produce similar daily profit.

Best for Home Mining

Tie

Both miners are equally suitable for home use.

Best for Efficiency

Avalon A1466

21.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Avalon A1346 vs Avalon A1466: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Avalon A1466 is more profitable at $-2.35/day compared to $-3.96/day for the Avalon A1346. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the Avalon A1346 or Avalon A1466?

Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.

Avalon A1346 vs Avalon A1466: which fits a residential setup better?

Both miners score similarly on our Home Mining Score. Consider your specific constraints (noise tolerance, available power, heat needs) to decide.

What is the efficiency difference between Avalon A1346 and Avalon A1466?

The Avalon A1346 runs at 30.0 J/TH while the Avalon A1466 runs at 21.5 J/TH — a difference of 8.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 28% better efficacité (30.0 vs 21.5 J/TH).