iBeLink BM-N3 Max vs Goldshell CK-BOX
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-N3 Max | Specification | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| 30.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 1.1 TH/s |
| 3,300 W | Consommation électrique | 215 W |
| 110.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 204.8 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Niveau de bruit | — |
| 6.6 kg | Weight | 2,000.0 kg |
| 11,260 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 734 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 31/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithme | Eaglesong |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-N3 Max
Goldshell CK-BOX
Based on BTC price of $78,184 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le iBeLink BM-N3 Max l'emporte sur 4 des 5 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Where it pulls away hardest is 2757% more hashrate (30.0 vs 1.1 TH/s). The Goldshell CK-BOX claws back ground on consommation électrique. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the iBeLink BM-N3 Max and Goldshell CK-BOX sit on each measurable spec:
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 2757% more hashrate (30.0 vs 1.1 TH/s)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 93% better power draw (3,300 vs 215 W)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 46% better efficacité (110 vs 205 J/TH)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 100% better weight (6.6 vs 2,000.0 kg)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 1435% more heat output (11,260 vs 734 BTU/hr)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 16% more score de minage domestique (36.0 vs 31.0)
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-N3 Max | Metric | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $190 |
| -$6.84 | Daily net profit | -$0.48 |
| -$2,497 | Net after 1 year | -$365 |
| -$4,994 | Net after 2 years | -$539 |
| -$7,490 | 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
iBeLink BM-N3 MaxScore: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iBeLink BM-N3 Max110.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the iBeLink BM-N3 Max or the Goldshell CK-BOX?
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 $-6.84/day for the iBeLink BM-N3 Max. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the iBeLink BM-N3 Max or the Goldshell CK-BOX better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The iBeLink BM-N3 Max is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Goldshell CK-BOX at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the iBeLink BM-N3 Max or Goldshell CK-BOX?
The iBeLink BM-N3 Max scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Goldshell CK-BOX). 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-N3 Max and Goldshell CK-BOX on J/TH?
The iBeLink BM-N3 Max runs at 110.0 J/TH while the Goldshell CK-BOX runs at 204.8 J/TH — a difference of 94.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 46% better efficacité (110 vs 205 J/TH).