iPollo V1 Classic vs iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iPollo V1 Classic | Specification | iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 |
|---|---|---|
| 1.6 GH/s | Taux de hachage | 280.0 MH/s |
| 1,240 W | Consommation électrique | 220 W |
| 800,000.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 785,714.3 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 40 dB |
| 13,000.0 kg | Weight | 2.1 kg |
| 4,231 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 751 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 66/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Etchash | Algorithme | EtHash |
| iPollo | Manufacturer | iPollo |
Profitability Comparison
iPollo V1 Classic
iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280
Based on BTC price of $78,236 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280, which leads on 4 of 6 weighted factors (efficacité, consommation électrique, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). Its biggest concrete edge: 82% better power draw (1,240 vs 220 W). That said, the iPollo V1 Classic isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins hashrate and rapport qualité-prix. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
The iPollo V1 Classic and iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- iPollo V1 Classic 454% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 82% better power draw (1,240 vs 220 W)
- iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 2% better efficacité (800,000 vs 785,714 J/TH)
- iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 100% better weight (13,000.0 vs 2.1 kg)
- iPollo V1 Classic 464% more heat output (4,231 vs 751 BTU/hr)
- iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 113% more score de minage domestique (31.0 vs 66.0)
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.
| iPollo V1 Classic | Metric | iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 |
|---|---|---|
| $369 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $700 |
| -$2.98 | Daily net profit | -$0.53 |
| -$1,455 | Net after 1 year | -$893 |
| -$2,541 | Net after 2 years | -$1,085 |
| -$3,628 | Net after 3 years | -$1,278 |
| 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
iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280Score: 66/100. 40 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280785,714.3 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
iPollo V1 Classic vs iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 is more profitable at $-0.53/day compared to $-2.98/day for the iPollo V1 Classic. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the iPollo V1 Classic or iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280?
The iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 is quieter at 40 dB compared to the iPollo V1 Classic at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the iPollo V1 Classic or the iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280?
The iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 scores 66/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the iPollo V1 Classic). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
What is the efficiency difference between iPollo V1 Classic and iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280?
The iPollo V1 Classic runs at 800,000.0 J/TH while the iPollo V1 Mini Wifi 280 runs at 785,714.3 J/TH — a difference of 14,285.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 2% better efficacité (800,000 vs 785,714 J/TH).