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 | 45 dB |
| 9,900.0 kg | Weight | 2.0 kg |
| 8,189 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 734 BTU/hr |
| 26/100 | Home Mining Score | 59/100 |
| — | 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
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Goldshell CK-BOX, which leads on 4 of 5 weighted factors (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Where it pulls away hardest is 91% better power draw (2,400 vs 215 W). 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
Here is every spec where the iBeLink BM-N1 and Goldshell CK-BOX actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- 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 100% better weight (9,900.0 vs 2.0 kg)
- iBeLink BM-N1 1016% more heat output (8,189 vs 734 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 127% more score de minage domestique (26.0 vs 59.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
A miner pays for itself in profit, not specs. These projections track upfront cost against one, two and three years of net earnings at $0.10/kWh.
| iBeLink BM-N1 | Metric | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $399 |
| -$5.52 | Daily net profit | -$0.48 |
| -$2,016 | Net after 1 year | -$574 |
| -$4,031 | Net after 2 years | -$748 |
| -$6,047 | Net after 3 years | -$923 |
| — | 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: 59/100. 45 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?
The Goldshell CK-BOX is quieter at 45 dB compared to the iBeLink BM-N1 at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the iBeLink BM-N1 or Goldshell CK-BOX?
The Goldshell CK-BOX scores 59/100 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.
How far apart are the iBeLink BM-N1 and Goldshell CK-BOX on J/TH?
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).