Passer au contenu

Nous améliorons nos opérations pour mieux vous servir. Les commandes sont expédiées normalement depuis Laval, QC. Questions? Contactez-nous

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

iBeLink BM-N3

iBeLink BM-N3

Taux de hachage 25.0 TH/s Puissance 3,300 W Efficiency 132.0 J/TH
VS
iBeLink BM-N3 Max

iBeLink BM-N3 Max

Taux de hachage 30.0 TH/s Puissance 3,300 W Efficiency 110.0 J/TH

iBeLink BM-N3 vs iBeLink BM-N3 Max

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

Specifications Comparison

iBeLink BM-N3 Specification iBeLink BM-N3 Max
25.0 TH/s Taux de hachage 30.0 TH/s
3,300 W Consommation électrique 3,300 W
132.0 J/TH Efficiency 110.0 J/TH
Niveau de bruit 75 dB
Weight 6.6 kg
11,260 BTU/hr BTU Output 11,260 BTU/hr
22/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
Eaglesong Algorithme Eaglesong
iBeLink Manufacturer iBeLink

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

iBeLink BM-N3

Daily Revenue 0.00001150 BTC $0.90
Daily Electricity -$7.92
Daily Profit -$7.02
Monthly -$210.62
Yearly -$2,562.57

iBeLink BM-N3 Max

Daily Revenue 0.00001381 BTC $1.08
Daily Electricity -$7.92
Daily Profit -$6.84
Monthly -$205.23
Yearly -$2,496.93

Based on BTC price of $78,165 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Our scoring model gives the nod to the iBeLink BM-N3 Max, which leads on 4 of 4 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Its biggest concrete edge: 17% better efficacité (132 vs 110 J/TH). The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.

Winner: iBeLink BM-N3 Max — l'emporte sur 4 des 4 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the iBeLink BM-N3 and iBeLink BM-N3 Max actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • iBeLink BM-N3 Max 20% more hashrate (25.0 vs 30.0 TH/s)
  • iBeLink BM-N3 Max 17% better efficacité (132 vs 110 J/TH)
  • iBeLink BM-N3 Max 64% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 36.0)

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 Metric iBeLink BM-N3 Max
$980 Upfront cost (MSRP)
-$7.02 Daily net profit -$6.84
-$3,543 Net after 1 year -$2,497
-$6,105 Net after 2 years -$4,994
-$8,668 Net after 3 years -$7,491
Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) Payback period

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

iBeLink BM-N3 Max

Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

iBeLink BM-N3 Max

110.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

iBeLink BM-N3 vs iBeLink BM-N3 Max: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the iBeLink BM-N3 Max is more profitable at $-6.84/day compared to $-7.02/day for the iBeLink BM-N3. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the iBeLink BM-N3 or the iBeLink BM-N3 Max better for noise-sensitive spaces?

The iBeLink BM-N3 Max is quieter at 75 dB compared to the iBeLink BM-N3 at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.

iBeLink BM-N3 vs iBeLink BM-N3 Max: which fits a residential setup better?

The iBeLink BM-N3 Max scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the iBeLink BM-N3). 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 and iBeLink BM-N3 Max on J/TH?

The iBeLink BM-N3 runs at 132.0 J/TH while the iBeLink BM-N3 Max runs at 110.0 J/TH — a difference of 22.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 17% better efficacité (132 vs 110 J/TH).