iBeLink BM-N1 vs Goldshell CK Box II
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-N1 | Specification | Goldshell CK Box II |
|---|---|---|
| 6.6 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 2.1 TH/s |
| 2,400 W | Consommation électrique | 400 W |
| 363.6 J/TH | Efficiency | 190.5 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 9,900.0 kg | Weight | 3.0 kg |
| 8,189 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,365 BTU/hr |
| 26/100 | Home Mining Score | 34/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithme | Eaglesong |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-N1
Goldshell CK Box II
Based on BTC price of $77,902 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Goldshell CK Box II l'emporte sur 3 des 4 facteurs (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique). The standout gap is 83% better power draw (2,400 vs 400 W) in the Goldshell CK Box II's favour. The iBeLink BM-N1 claws back ground on hashrate. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the iBeLink BM-N1 and Goldshell CK Box II sit on each measurable spec:
- iBeLink BM-N1 214% more hashrate (6.6 vs 2.1 TH/s)
- Goldshell CK Box II 83% better power draw (2,400 vs 400 W)
- Goldshell CK Box II 48% better efficacité (364 vs 190 J/TH)
- Goldshell CK Box II 100% better weight (9,900.0 vs 3.0 kg)
- iBeLink BM-N1 500% more heat output (8,189 vs 1,365 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell CK Box II 31% more score de minage domestique (26.0 vs 34.0)
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.
| iBeLink BM-N1 | Metric | Goldshell CK Box II |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $246 |
| -$5.52 | Daily net profit | -$0.88 |
| -$2,016 | Net after 1 year | -$569 |
| -$4,032 | Net after 2 years | -$892 |
| -$6,048 | Net after 3 years | -$1,215 |
| — | 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
Goldshell CK Box IIScore: 34/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell CK Box II190.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the iBeLink BM-N1 or Goldshell CK Box II more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell CK Box II is more profitable at $-0.88/day compared to $-5.52/day for the iBeLink BM-N1. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
iBeLink BM-N1 vs Goldshell CK Box II: which runs at a lower noise level?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
For mining at home, should I pick the iBeLink BM-N1 or the Goldshell CK Box II?
The Goldshell CK Box II scores 34/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 26/100 for the iBeLink BM-N1). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
iBeLink BM-N1 vs Goldshell CK Box II: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The iBeLink BM-N1 runs at 363.6 J/TH while the Goldshell CK Box II runs at 190.5 J/TH — a difference of 173.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 48% better efficacité (364 vs 190 J/TH).