Canaan Avalon A1566I vs Canaan AvalonMiner A1326
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Canaan Avalon A1566I | Specification | Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 |
|---|---|---|
| 249.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 115.0 TH/s |
| 4,500 W | Consommation électrique | 3,500 W |
| 18.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 30.4 J/TH |
| 50 dB | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 11.3 kg | Weight | 13.0 kg |
| 15,354 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 11,942 BTU/hr |
| 44/100 | Home Mining Score | 36/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| Canaan | Manufacturer | Canaan |
Profitability Comparison
Canaan Avalon A1566I
Canaan AvalonMiner A1326
Based on BTC price of $78,083 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Canaan Avalon A1566I l'emporte sur 4 des 6 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Its biggest concrete edge: 117% more hashrate (249 vs 115 TH/s). The Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 claws back ground on consommation électrique and rapport qualité-prix. 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 Canaan Avalon A1566I and Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 117% more hashrate (249 vs 115 TH/s)
- Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 22% better power draw (4,500 vs 3,500 W)
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 41% better efficacité (18.1 vs 30.4 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 33% better noise (50.0 vs 75.0 dB)
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 13% better weight (11.3 vs 13.0 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 29% more heat output (15,354 vs 11,942 BTU/hr)
- Canaan Avalon A1566I 22% more score de minage domestique (44.0 vs 36.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Sticker price versus what the miner actually earns back: the table below projects cumulative net profit at a $0.10/kWh electricity rate.
| Canaan Avalon A1566I | Metric | Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 |
|---|---|---|
| $2,710 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $609 |
| -$1.85 | Daily net profit | -$4.27 |
| -$3,386 | Net after 1 year | -$2,167 |
| -$4,063 | Net after 2 years | -$3,724 |
| -$4,739 | Net after 3 years | -$5,282 |
| 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
Canaan Avalon A1566IScore: 44/100. 50 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A1566I18.1 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Canaan Avalon A1566I or Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A1566I is more profitable at $-1.85/day compared to $-4.27/day for the Canaan AvalonMiner A1326. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Canaan Avalon A1566I vs Canaan AvalonMiner A1326: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Canaan Avalon A1566I is quieter at 50 dB compared to the Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Canaan Avalon A1566I or the Canaan AvalonMiner A1326?
The Canaan Avalon A1566I scores 44/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 36/100 for the Canaan AvalonMiner A1326). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Canaan Avalon A1566I and Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 on J/TH?
The Canaan Avalon A1566I runs at 18.1 J/TH while the Canaan AvalonMiner A1326 runs at 30.4 J/TH — a difference of 12.4 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 41% better efficacité (18.1 vs 30.4 J/TH).