iBeLink BM-N1 vs Goldshell CK-BOX
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-N1 | Specification | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| 6.6 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 1.1 TH/s |
| 2,400 W | Consommation électrique | 215 W |
| 363.6 J/TH | Efficiency | 204.8 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 9,900.0 kg | Weight | 2,000.0 kg |
| 8,189 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 734 BTU/hr |
| 26/100 | Home Mining Score | 31/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithme | Eaglesong |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-N1
Goldshell CK-BOX
Based on BTC price of $78,184 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Goldshell CK-BOX comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 4 (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique). Where it pulls away hardest is 91% better power draw (2,400 vs 215 W). That said, the iBeLink BM-N1 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins hashrate. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
The iBeLink BM-N1 and Goldshell CK-BOX diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- iBeLink BM-N1 529% more hashrate (6.6 vs 1.1 TH/s)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 91% better power draw (2,400 vs 215 W)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 44% better efficacité (364 vs 205 J/TH)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 80% better weight (9,900 vs 2,000 kg)
- iBeLink BM-N1 1016% more heat output (8,189 vs 734 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 19% more score de minage domestique (26.0 vs 31.0)
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.
| iBeLink BM-N1 | Metric | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $190 |
| -$5.52 | Daily net profit | -$0.48 |
| -$2,016 | Net after 1 year | -$365 |
| -$4,031 | Net after 2 years | -$539 |
| -$6,047 | Net after 3 years | -$714 |
| — | 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-BOXScore: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell CK-BOX204.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the iBeLink BM-N1 or Goldshell CK-BOX more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell CK-BOX is more profitable at $-0.48/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: 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?
The Goldshell CK-BOX scores 31/100 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: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The iBeLink BM-N1 runs at 363.6 J/TH while the Goldshell CK-BOX runs at 204.8 J/TH — a difference of 158.9 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 44% better efficacité (364 vs 205 J/TH).