MicroBT Whatsminer M10 vs MicroBT Whatsminer M61
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| MicroBT Whatsminer M10 | Specification | MicroBT Whatsminer M61 |
|---|---|---|
| 33.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 200.0 TH/s |
| 2,145 W | Consommation électrique | 3,980 W |
| 65.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 19.9 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 75 dB |
| 8,550.0 kg | Weight | 13.5 kg |
| 7,319 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 13,580 BTU/hr |
| 26/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| MicroBT | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
MicroBT Whatsminer M10
MicroBT Whatsminer M61
Based on BTC price of $78,185 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the MicroBT Whatsminer M61 edges it: 5 of 6 factors go its way (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore, rapport qualité-prix). The standout gap is 506% more hashrate (33.0 vs 200.0 TH/s) in the MicroBT Whatsminer M61's favour. The MicroBT Whatsminer M10 holds the edge in consommation électrique. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the MicroBT Whatsminer M10 and MicroBT Whatsminer M61 sit on each measurable spec:
- MicroBT Whatsminer M61 506% more hashrate (33.0 vs 200.0 TH/s)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M10 46% better power draw (2,145 vs 3,980 W)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M61 69% better efficacité (65.0 vs 19.9 J/TH)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M61 100% better weight (8,550.0 vs 13.5 kg)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M61 86% more heat output (7,319 vs 13,580 BTU/hr)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M61 15% more score de minage domestique (26.0 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.
| MicroBT Whatsminer M10 | Metric | MicroBT Whatsminer M61 |
|---|---|---|
| $2,500 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $2,200 |
| -$3.96 | Daily net profit | -$2.36 |
| -$3,946 | Net after 1 year | -$3,060 |
| -$5,391 | Net after 2 years | -$3,920 |
| -$6,837 | Net after 3 years | -$4,780 |
| 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
MicroBT Whatsminer M61Score: 30/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
MicroBT Whatsminer M6119.9 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the MicroBT Whatsminer M10 or MicroBT Whatsminer M61 more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT Whatsminer M61 is more profitable at $-2.36/day compared to $-3.96/day for the MicroBT Whatsminer M10. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
MicroBT Whatsminer M10 vs MicroBT Whatsminer M61: which runs at a lower noise level?
The MicroBT Whatsminer M61 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the MicroBT Whatsminer M10 at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the MicroBT Whatsminer M10 or MicroBT Whatsminer M61?
The MicroBT Whatsminer M61 scores 30/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 26/100 for the MicroBT Whatsminer M10). 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 MicroBT Whatsminer M10 and MicroBT Whatsminer M61?
The MicroBT Whatsminer M10 runs at 65.0 J/TH while the MicroBT Whatsminer M61 runs at 19.9 J/TH — a difference of 45.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 69% better efficacité (65.0 vs 19.9 J/TH).