IceRiver KS0 Pro vs Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| IceRiver KS0 Pro | Specification | Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) |
|---|---|---|
| 200.0 GH/s | Taux de hachage | 10.5 TH/s |
| 100 W | Consommation électrique | 3,600 W |
| 500.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 342.9 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 2.5 kg | Weight | 14.5 kg |
| 341 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 12,283 BTU/hr |
| 71/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| KHeavyHash | Algorithme | KHeavyHash |
| IceRiver | Manufacturer | Dragonball |
Profitability Comparison
IceRiver KS0 Pro
Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)
Based on BTC price of $78,210 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Selon notre analyse multifactorielle, le Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) l'emporte sur 3 des 6 facteurs (efficacité, hashrate, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 5150% more hashrate (0.2 vs 10.5 TH/s) in the Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)'s favour. The IceRiver KS0 Pro holds the edge in consommation électrique and score de minage domestique and niveau sonore. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the IceRiver KS0 Pro and Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) 5150% more hashrate (0.2 vs 10.5 TH/s)
- IceRiver KS0 Pro 97% better power draw (100 vs 3,600 W)
- Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) 31% better efficacité (500 vs 343 J/TH)
- IceRiver KS0 Pro 53% better noise (35.0 vs 75.0 dB)
- IceRiver KS0 Pro 83% better weight (2.5 vs 14.5 kg)
- Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) 3500% more heat output (341 vs 12,283 BTU/hr)
- IceRiver KS0 Pro 137% more score de minage domestique (71.0 vs 30.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Sticker price versus what the miner actually earns back: the table below projects cumulative net profit at a $0.10/kWh electricity rate.
| IceRiver KS0 Pro | Metric | Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) |
|---|---|---|
| $199 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $5,540 |
| -$0.23 | Daily net profit | -$8.26 |
| -$284 | Net after 1 year | -$8,556 |
| -$369 | Net after 2 years | -$11,571 |
| -$454 | Net after 3 years | -$14,587 |
| 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
TieBoth miners produce similar daily profit.
Best for Home Mining
IceRiver KS0 ProScore: 71/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)342.9 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
IceRiver KS0 Pro vs Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the IceRiver KS0 Pro is more profitable at $-0.23/day compared to $-8.26/day for the Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
IceRiver KS0 Pro vs Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T): which runs at a lower noise level?
The IceRiver KS0 Pro is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the IceRiver KS0 Pro or Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)?
The IceRiver KS0 Pro scores 71/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the IceRiver KS0 Pro and Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) on J/TH?
The IceRiver KS0 Pro runs at 500.0 J/TH while the Dragonball KS6 Pro (10.5T) runs at 342.9 J/TH — a difference of 157.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 31% better efficacité (500 vs 343 J/TH).