Passer au contenu

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

Bitaxe Supra

Bitaxe Supra

Taux de hachage 700.0 GH/s Puissance 15 W Efficiency 21.4 J/TH
VS
Ebang Ebit E12+

Ebang Ebit E12+

Taux de hachage 50.0 TH/s Puissance 2,500 W Efficiency 50.0 J/TH

Bitaxe Supra vs Ebang Ebit E12+

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

Specifications Comparison

Bitaxe Supra Specification Ebang Ebit E12+
700.0 GH/s Taux de hachage 50.0 TH/s
15 W Consommation électrique 2,500 W
21.4 J/TH Efficiency 50.0 J/TH
35 dB Niveau de bruit
0.3 kg Weight 10.5 kg
51 BTU/hr BTU Output 8,530 BTU/hr
70/100 Home Mining Score 26/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
D-Central Manufacturer Ebang

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Bitaxe Supra

Daily Revenue 0.00000032 BTC $0.02
Daily Electricity -$0.04
Daily Profit -$0.02
Monthly -$0.49
Yearly -$5.91

Ebang Ebit E12+

Daily Revenue 0.00002262 BTC $1.41
Daily Electricity -$6.00
Daily Profit -$4.59
Monthly -$137.57
Yearly -$1,673.75

Based on BTC price of $62,527 and current network difficulty as of Jun 4, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Bitaxe Supra comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 5 (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Where it pulls away hardest is 99% better power draw (15.0 vs 2,500.0 W). The Ebang Ebit E12+ holds the edge in hashrate. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.

Winner: Bitaxe Supra — l'emporte sur 4 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

The Bitaxe Supra and Ebang Ebit E12+ diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":

  • Ebang Ebit E12+ 7043% more hashrate (0.7 vs 50.0 TH/s)
  • Bitaxe Supra 99% better power draw (15.0 vs 2,500.0 W)
  • Bitaxe Supra 57% better efficacité (21.4 vs 50.0 J/TH)
  • Bitaxe Supra 97% better weight (0.3 vs 10.5 kg)
  • Ebang Ebit E12+ 16560% more heat output (51.2 vs 8,530.0 BTU/hr)
  • Bitaxe Supra 169% more score de minage domestique (70.0 vs 26.0)

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.

Bitaxe Supra Metric Ebang Ebit E12+
$89 Upfront cost (MSRP)
-$0.02 Daily net profit -$4.59
-$95 Net after 1 year -$1,674
-$101 Net after 2 years -$3,348
-$107 Net after 3 years -$5,021
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

Tie

Both miners produce similar daily profit.

Best for Home Mining

Bitaxe Supra

Score: 70/100. 35 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

Bitaxe Supra

21.4 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Bitaxe Supra or Ebang Ebit E12+ more profitable?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitaxe Supra is more profitable at $-0.02/day compared to $-4.59/day for the Ebang Ebit E12+. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the Bitaxe Supra or Ebang Ebit E12+?

The Bitaxe Supra is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Ebang Ebit E12+ at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.

For mining at home, should I pick the Bitaxe Supra or the Ebang Ebit E12+?

The Bitaxe Supra scores 70/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 26/100 for the Ebang Ebit E12+). 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 Bitaxe Supra and Ebang Ebit E12+?

The Bitaxe Supra runs at 21.4 J/TH while the Ebang Ebit E12+ runs at 50.0 J/TH — a difference of 28.6 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 57% better efficacité (21.4 vs 50.0 J/TH).