Passer au contenu

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

Bitaxe Ultra

Bitaxe Ultra

Taux de hachage 500.0 GH/s Puissance 15 W Efficiency 30.0 J/TH
VS
NerdQAxe

NerdQAxe

Taux de hachage 2.0 TH/s Puissance 80 W Efficiency 40.0 J/TH

Bitaxe Ultra vs NerdQAxe

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

Specifications Comparison

Bitaxe Ultra Specification NerdQAxe
500.0 GH/s Taux de hachage 2.0 TH/s
15 W Consommation électrique 80 W
30.0 J/TH Efficiency 40.0 J/TH
35 dB Niveau de bruit 40 dB
0.3 kg Weight 0.4 kg
51 BTU/hr BTU Output 273 BTU/hr
70/100 Home Mining Score 71/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
D-Central Manufacturer D-Central

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Bitaxe Ultra

Daily Revenue 0.00000023 BTC $0.01
Daily Electricity -$0.04
Daily Profit -$0.02
Monthly -$0.65
Yearly -$7.86

NerdQAxe

Daily Revenue 0.00000090 BTC $0.06
Daily Electricity -$0.19
Daily Profit -$0.13
Monthly -$4.02
Yearly -$48.94

Based on BTC price of $64,000 and current network difficulty as of Jun 4, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Bitaxe Ultra comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 6 (efficacité, consommation électrique, niveau sonore). Its biggest concrete edge: 81% better power draw (15.0 vs 80.0 W). That said, the NerdQAxe isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins hashrate and score de minage domestique and rapport qualité-prix. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: Bitaxe Ultra — l'emporte sur 3 des 6 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Bitaxe Ultra and NerdQAxe sit on each measurable spec:

  • NerdQAxe 300% more hashrate (0.5 vs 2.0 TH/s)
  • Bitaxe Ultra 81% better power draw (15.0 vs 80.0 W)
  • Bitaxe Ultra 25% better efficacité (30.0 vs 40.0 J/TH)
  • Bitaxe Ultra 13% better noise (35.0 vs 40.0 dB)
  • Bitaxe Ultra 25% better weight (0.3 vs 0.4 kg)
  • NerdQAxe 433% more heat output (51.2 vs 273.0 BTU/hr)
  • NerdQAxe 1% more score de minage domestique (70.0 vs 71.0)

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 Ultra Metric NerdQAxe
$79 Upfront cost (MSRP) $249
-$0.02 Daily net profit -$0.13
-$87 Net after 1 year -$298
-$95 Net after 2 years -$347
-$103 Net after 3 years -$396
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

NerdQAxe

Score: 71/100. 40 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

Bitaxe Ultra

30.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Bitaxe Ultra vs NerdQAxe: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitaxe Ultra is more profitable at $-0.02/day compared to $-0.13/day for the NerdQAxe. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Bitaxe Ultra vs NerdQAxe: which runs at a lower noise level?

The Bitaxe Ultra is quieter at 35 dB compared to the NerdQAxe at 40 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.

Bitaxe Ultra vs NerdQAxe: which fits a residential setup better?

The NerdQAxe scores 71/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 70/100 for the Bitaxe Ultra). 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 Ultra and NerdQAxe?

The Bitaxe Ultra runs at 30.0 J/TH while the NerdQAxe runs at 40.0 J/TH — a difference of 10.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 25% better efficacité (30.0 vs 40.0 J/TH).