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 HS5

Goldshell HS5

Taux de hachage 2.7 TH/s Puissance 2,650 W Efficiency 981.5 J/TH

iBeLink BM-S1 vs Goldshell HS5

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

Specifications Comparison

iBeLink BM-S1 Specification Goldshell HS5
6.8 TH/s Taux de hachage 2.7 TH/s
2,350 W Consommation électrique 2,650 W
345.6 J/TH Efficiency 981.5 J/TH
Niveau de bruit
9.0 kg Weight 8.5 kg
8,018 BTU/hr BTU Output 9,042 BTU/hr
26/100 Home Mining Score 22/100
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 HS5

Daily Revenue 0.00000122 BTC $0.09
Daily Electricity -$6.36
Daily Profit -$6.27
Monthly -$188.11
Yearly -$2,288.62

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

Verdict

Our scoring model gives the nod to the iBeLink BM-S1, which leads on 5 of 5 weighted factors (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 65% better efficacité (346 vs 981 J/TH) in the iBeLink BM-S1's favour. 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 5 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

The iBeLink BM-S1 and Goldshell HS5 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":

  • iBeLink BM-S1 152% more hashrate (6.8 vs 2.7 TH/s)
  • iBeLink BM-S1 11% better power draw (2,350 vs 2,650 W)
  • iBeLink BM-S1 65% better efficacité (346 vs 981 J/TH)
  • Goldshell HS5 6% better weight (9.0 vs 8.5 kg)
  • Goldshell HS5 13% more heat output (8,018 vs 9,042 BTU/hr)
  • iBeLink BM-S1 18% more score de minage domestique (26.0 vs 22.0)

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 HS5
$768 Upfront cost (MSRP) $949
-$5.41 Daily net profit -$6.27
-$2,744 Net after 1 year -$3,238
-$4,720 Net after 2 years -$5,526
-$6,696 Net after 3 years -$7,815
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

iBeLink BM-S1

Score: 26/100. 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 HS5 more profitable?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the iBeLink BM-S1 is more profitable at $-5.41/day compared to $-6.27/day for the Goldshell HS5. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the iBeLink BM-S1 or the Goldshell HS5 better for noise-sensitive spaces?

Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.

Which is better for home mining, the iBeLink BM-S1 or Goldshell HS5?

The iBeLink BM-S1 scores 26/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Goldshell HS5). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.

iBeLink BM-S1 vs Goldshell HS5: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The iBeLink BM-S1 runs at 345.6 J/TH while the Goldshell HS5 runs at 981.5 J/TH — a difference of 635.9 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 981 J/TH).