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 A1366

Avalon A1366

Taux de hachage 130.0 TH/s Puissance 3,250 W Efficiency 25.0 J/TH
VS
Avalon A1566

Avalon A1566

Taux de hachage 185.0 TH/s Puissance 3,420 W Efficiency 18.5 J/TH

Avalon A1366 vs Avalon A1566

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

Specifications Comparison

Avalon A1366 Specification Avalon A1566
130.0 TH/s Taux de hachage 185.0 TH/s
3,250 W Consommation électrique 3,420 W
25.0 J/TH Efficiency 18.5 J/TH
75 dB Niveau de bruit 75 dB
12.6 kg Weight 14.9 kg
11,089 BTU/hr BTU Output 11,669 BTU/hr
36/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
Canaan Manufacturer Canaan

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Avalon A1366

Daily Revenue 0.00005982 BTC $4.68
Daily Electricity -$7.80
Daily Profit -$3.12
Monthly -$93.59
Yearly -$1,138.66

Avalon A1566

Daily Revenue 0.00008513 BTC $6.66
Daily Electricity -$8.21
Daily Profit -$1.55
Monthly -$46.42
Yearly -$564.82

Based on BTC price of $78,236 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Avalon A1566 comes out ahead — it takes 2 of 4 (efficacité, hashrate). Where it pulls away hardest is 42% more hashrate (130 vs 185 TH/s). The Avalon A1366 claws back ground on consommation électrique and rapport qualité-prix. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.

Winner: Avalon A1566 — l'emporte sur 2 des 4 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Avalon A1366 and Avalon A1566 sit on each measurable spec:

  • Avalon A1566 42% more hashrate (130 vs 185 TH/s)
  • Avalon A1366 5% better power draw (3,250 vs 3,420 W)
  • Avalon A1566 26% better efficacité (25.0 vs 18.5 J/TH)
  • Avalon A1366 15% better weight (12.6 vs 14.9 kg)
  • Avalon A1566 5% more heat output (11,089 vs 11,669 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 A1366 Metric Avalon A1566
$3,500 Upfront cost (MSRP) $5,500
-$3.12 Daily net profit -$1.55
-$4,639 Net after 1 year -$6,065
-$5,777 Net after 2 years -$6,630
-$6,916 Net after 3 years -$7,194
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 A1566

18.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Avalon A1366 vs Avalon A1566: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Avalon A1566 is more profitable at $-1.55/day compared to $-3.12/day for the Avalon A1366. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the Avalon A1366 or the Avalon A1566 better for noise-sensitive spaces?

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

Avalon A1366 vs Avalon A1566: 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.

Avalon A1366 vs Avalon A1566: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The Avalon A1366 runs at 25.0 J/TH while the Avalon A1566 runs at 18.5 J/TH — a difference of 6.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 26% better efficacité (25.0 vs 18.5 J/TH).