Passer au contenu

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

iBeLink BM-S1

iBeLink BM-S1

Taux de hachage 6.8 TH/s Puissance 2,350 W Efficiency 345.6 J/TH
VS
Goldshell HS3

Goldshell HS3

Taux de hachage 2.0 TH/s Puissance 2,000 W Efficiency 1,000.0 J/TH

iBeLink BM-S1 vs Goldshell HS3

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

Specifications Comparison

iBeLink BM-S1 Specification Goldshell HS3
6.8 TH/s Taux de hachage 2.0 TH/s
2,350 W Consommation électrique 2,000 W
345.6 J/TH Efficiency 1,000.0 J/TH
Niveau de bruit
9.0 kg Weight 7.0 kg
8,018 BTU/hr BTU Output 6,824 BTU/hr
26/100 Home Mining Score 28/100
Release Year
Blake2b-sia Algorithme Blake2b-sia
iBeLink Manufacturer Goldshell

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

iBeLink BM-S1

Daily Revenue 0.00000308 BTC $0.23
Daily Electricity -$5.64
Daily Profit -$5.41
Monthly -$162.42
Yearly -$1,976.06

Goldshell HS3

Daily Revenue 0.00000090 BTC $0.07
Daily Electricity -$4.80
Daily Profit -$4.73
Monthly -$142.00
Yearly -$1,727.72

Based on BTC price of $73,512 and current network difficulty as of May 30, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Run the numbers across every spec and the iBeLink BM-S1 edges it: 3 of 5 factors go its way (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). Its biggest concrete edge: 240% more hashrate (6.8 vs 2.0 TH/s). That said, the Goldshell HS3 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins consommation électrique and score de minage domestique. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.

Winner: iBeLink BM-S1 — l'emporte sur 3 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the iBeLink BM-S1 and Goldshell HS3 actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • iBeLink BM-S1 240% more hashrate (6.8 vs 2.0 TH/s)
  • Goldshell HS3 15% better power draw (2,350 vs 2,000 W)
  • iBeLink BM-S1 65% better efficacité (346 vs 1,000 J/TH)
  • Goldshell HS3 22% better weight (9.0 vs 7.0 kg)
  • iBeLink BM-S1 18% more heat output (8,018 vs 6,824 BTU/hr)
  • Goldshell HS3 8% more score de minage domestique (26.0 vs 28.0)

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-S1 Metric Goldshell HS3
$768 Upfront cost (MSRP) $1,100
-$5.41 Daily net profit -$4.73
-$2,744 Net after 1 year -$2,828
-$4,720 Net after 2 years -$4,555
-$6,696 Net after 3 years -$6,283
Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) 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

Tie

Both miners produce similar daily profit.

Best for Home Mining

Goldshell HS3

Score: 28/100. 0 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

iBeLink BM-S1

345.6 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the iBeLink BM-S1 or Goldshell HS3 more profitable?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell HS3 is more profitable at $-4.73/day compared to $-5.41/day for the iBeLink BM-S1. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the iBeLink BM-S1 or Goldshell HS3?

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-S1 or the Goldshell HS3?

The Goldshell HS3 scores 28/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 26/100 for the iBeLink BM-S1). 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-S1 and Goldshell HS3 on J/TH?

The iBeLink BM-S1 runs at 345.6 J/TH while the Goldshell HS3 runs at 1,000.0 J/TH — a difference of 654.4 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 65% better efficacité (346 vs 1,000 J/TH).