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

IceRiver KS3

IceRiver KS3

Taux de hachage 8.0 TH/s Puissance 3,200 W Efficiency 400.0 J/TH
VS
Bitmain KAS KS7

Bitmain KAS KS7

Taux de hachage 40.0 TH/s Puissance 3,080 W Efficiency 77.0 J/TH

IceRiver KS3 vs Bitmain KAS KS7

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

Specifications Comparison

IceRiver KS3 Specification Bitmain KAS KS7
8.0 TH/s Taux de hachage 40.0 TH/s
3,200 W Consommation électrique 3,080 W
400.0 J/TH Efficiency 77.0 J/TH
75 dB Niveau de bruit 75 dB
14.4 kg Weight 16.4 kg
10,918 BTU/hr BTU Output 10,509 BTU/hr
36/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
KHeavyHash Algorithme KHeavyHash
IceRiver Manufacturer Bitmain

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

IceRiver KS3

Daily Revenue 0.00000368 BTC $0.29
Daily Electricity -$7.68
Daily Profit -$7.39
Monthly -$221.76
Yearly -$2,698.06

Bitmain KAS KS7

Daily Revenue 0.00001841 BTC $1.44
Daily Electricity -$7.39
Daily Profit -$5.95
Monthly -$178.55
Yearly -$2,172.40

Based on BTC price of $78,241 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Bitmain KAS KS7 comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 4 (efficacité, hashrate, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). Its biggest concrete edge: 81% better efficacité (400.0 vs 77.0 J/TH). Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: Bitmain KAS KS7 — l'emporte sur 4 des 4 facteurs

Spec Deltas

The IceRiver KS3 and Bitmain KAS KS7 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":

  • Bitmain KAS KS7 400% more hashrate (8.0 vs 40.0 TH/s)
  • Bitmain KAS KS7 4% better power draw (3,200 vs 3,080 W)
  • Bitmain KAS KS7 81% better efficacité (400.0 vs 77.0 J/TH)
  • IceRiver KS3 12% better weight (14.4 vs 16.4 kg)
  • IceRiver KS3 4% more heat output (10,918 vs 10,509 BTU/hr)

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 KS3 Metric Bitmain KAS KS7
$10,000 Upfront cost (MSRP) $1,590
-$7.39 Daily net profit -$5.95
-$12,698 Net after 1 year -$3,762
-$15,396 Net after 2 years -$5,935
-$18,094 Net after 3 years -$8,107
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

Tie

Both miners are equally suitable for home use.

Best for Efficiency

Bitmain KAS KS7

77.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which makes more money, the IceRiver KS3 or the Bitmain KAS KS7?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain KAS KS7 is more profitable at $-5.95/day compared to $-7.39/day for the IceRiver KS3. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the IceRiver KS3 or Bitmain KAS KS7?

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

IceRiver KS3 vs Bitmain KAS KS7: which fits a residential setup better?

Both miners score similarly on our Home Mining Score. Consider your specific constraints (noise tolerance, available power, heat needs) to decide.

How far apart are the IceRiver KS3 and Bitmain KAS KS7 on J/TH?

The IceRiver KS3 runs at 400.0 J/TH while the Bitmain KAS KS7 runs at 77.0 J/TH — a difference of 323.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 81% better efficacité (400.0 vs 77.0 J/TH).