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

Canaan AvalonMiner 841

Canaan AvalonMiner 841

Taux de hachage 13.6 TH/s Puissance 1,290 W Efficiency 94.9 J/TH
VS

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

Taux de hachage 920.0 TH/s Puissance 13,340 W Efficiency 14.5 J/TH

Canaan AvalonMiner 841 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

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

Specifications Comparison

Canaan AvalonMiner 841 Specification MicroBT WhatsMiner M79
13.6 TH/s Taux de hachage 920.0 TH/s
1,290 W Consommation électrique 13,340 W
94.9 J/TH Efficiency 14.5 J/TH
Niveau de bruit 50 dB
4,700.0 kg Weight 37.0 kg
4,402 BTU/hr BTU Output 45,516 BTU/hr
31/100 Home Mining Score 44/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
Canaan Manufacturer MicroBT

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Canaan AvalonMiner 841

Daily Revenue 0.00000626 BTC $0.49
Daily Electricity -$3.10
Daily Profit -$2.61
Monthly -$78.20
Yearly -$951.44

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

Daily Revenue 0.00042337 BTC $33.10
Daily Electricity -$32.02
Daily Profit $1.09
Monthly $32.55
Yearly $396.05

Based on BTC price of $78,185 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Run the numbers across every spec and the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 edges it: 4 of 5 factors go its way (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). The standout gap is 6665% more hashrate (13.6 vs 920.0 TH/s) in the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79's favour. That said, the Canaan AvalonMiner 841 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins consommation électrique. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 — l'emporte sur 4 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Canaan AvalonMiner 841 and MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 sit on each measurable spec:

  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 6665% more hashrate (13.6 vs 920.0 TH/s)
  • Canaan AvalonMiner 841 90% better power draw (1,290 vs 13,340 W)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 85% better efficacité (94.9 vs 14.5 J/TH)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 99% better weight (4,700.0 vs 37.0 kg)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 934% more heat output (4,402 vs 45,516 BTU/hr)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 42% more score de minage domestique (31.0 vs 44.0)

Best For...

Best for Profitability

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

$3.69/day higher profit at current rates.

Best for Home Mining

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

Score: 44/100. 50 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79

14.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Canaan AvalonMiner 841 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 is more profitable at $1.09/day compared to $-2.61/day for the Canaan AvalonMiner 841. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Canaan AvalonMiner 841 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79: which runs at a lower noise level?

The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 is quieter at 50 dB compared to the Canaan AvalonMiner 841 at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.

For mining at home, should I pick the Canaan AvalonMiner 841 or the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79?

The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 scores 44/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Canaan AvalonMiner 841). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.

What is the efficiency difference between Canaan AvalonMiner 841 and MicroBT WhatsMiner M79?

The Canaan AvalonMiner 841 runs at 94.9 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 runs at 14.5 J/TH — a difference of 80.4 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 85% better efficacité (94.9 vs 14.5 J/TH).