Passer au contenu

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

Goldshell HS-BOX

Goldshell HS-BOX

Taux de hachage 235.0 GH/s Puissance 230 W Efficiency 978.7 J/TH
VS
Goldshell HS6

Goldshell HS6

Taux de hachage 4.3 TH/s Puissance 3,250 W Efficiency 755.8 J/TH

Goldshell HS-BOX vs Goldshell HS6

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

Specifications Comparison

Goldshell HS-BOX Specification Goldshell HS6
235.0 GH/s Taux de hachage 4.3 TH/s
230 W Consommation électrique 3,250 W
978.7 J/TH Efficiency 755.8 J/TH
Niveau de bruit
Weight 8.5 kg
785 BTU/hr BTU Output 11,089 BTU/hr
31/100 Home Mining Score 22/100
Release Year
Blake2b+sha3 Algorithme Blake2b+sha3
Goldshell Manufacturer Goldshell

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Goldshell HS-BOX

Daily Revenue 0.00000011 BTC $0.01
Daily Electricity -$0.55
Daily Profit -$0.55
Monthly -$16.36
Yearly -$199.04

Goldshell HS6

Daily Revenue 0.00000195 BTC $0.12
Daily Electricity -$7.80
Daily Profit -$7.68
Monthly -$230.32
Yearly -$2,802.28

Based on BTC price of $62,980 and current network difficulty as of Jun 4, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Goldshell HS6 l'emporte sur 2 des 5 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate). Its biggest concrete edge: 1730% more hashrate (0.2 vs 4.3 TH/s). The Goldshell HS-BOX claws back ground on consommation électrique and score de minage domestique and rapport qualité-prix. Cross-check the spec deltas and operating-cost table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.

Winner: Goldshell HS6 — l'emporte sur 3 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell HS-BOX and Goldshell HS6 sit on each measurable spec:

  • Goldshell HS6 1730% more hashrate (0.2 vs 4.3 TH/s)
  • Goldshell HS-BOX 93% better power draw (230 vs 3,250 W)
  • Goldshell HS6 23% better efficacité (979 vs 756 J/TH)
  • Goldshell HS6 1313% more heat output (785 vs 11,089 BTU/hr)
  • Goldshell HS-BOX 41% more score de minage domestique (31.0 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.

Goldshell HS-BOX Metric Goldshell HS6
$99 Upfront cost (MSRP) $3,100
-$0.55 Daily net profit -$7.68
-$298 Net after 1 year -$5,902
-$497 Net after 2 years -$8,705
-$696 Net after 3 years -$11,507
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 HS-BOX

Score: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

Goldshell HS6

755.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Goldshell HS-BOX vs Goldshell HS6: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell HS-BOX is more profitable at $-0.55/day compared to $-7.68/day for the Goldshell HS6. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the Goldshell HS-BOX or the Goldshell HS6 better for noise-sensitive spaces?

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

For mining at home, should I pick the Goldshell HS-BOX or the Goldshell HS6?

The Goldshell HS-BOX scores 31/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Goldshell HS6). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.

How far apart are the Goldshell HS-BOX and Goldshell HS6 on J/TH?

The Goldshell HS-BOX runs at 978.7 J/TH while the Goldshell HS6 runs at 755.8 J/TH — a difference of 222.9 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 23% better efficacité (979 vs 756 J/TH).