MicroBT Whatsminer M10S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| MicroBT Whatsminer M10S | Specification | MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 |
|---|---|---|
| 55.0 TH/s | Taux de hachage | 920.0 TH/s |
| 3,500 W | Consommation électrique | 13,340 W |
| 63.6 J/TH | Efficiency | 14.5 J/TH |
| — | Niveau de bruit | 50 dB |
| 10,700.0 kg | Weight | 37.0 kg |
| 11,942 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 45,516 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 44/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithme | SHA-256 |
| MicroBT | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
MicroBT Whatsminer M10S
MicroBT WhatsMiner M79
Based on BTC price of $78,185 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 5 (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). The standout gap is 1573% more hashrate (55.0 vs 920.0 TH/s) in the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79's favour. That said, the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins consommation électrique. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S and MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 1573% more hashrate (55.0 vs 920.0 TH/s)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M10S 74% better power draw (3,500 vs 13,340 W)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 77% better efficacité (63.6 vs 14.5 J/TH)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 100% better weight (10,700.0 vs 37.0 kg)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 281% more heat output (11,942 vs 45,516 BTU/hr)
- MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 100% more score de minage domestique (22.0 vs 44.0)
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 M10S | Metric | MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 |
|---|---|---|
| $3,800 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$6.42 | Daily net profit | $1.09 |
| -$6,144 | Net after 1 year | +$396 |
| -$8,487 | Net after 2 years | +$792 |
| -$10,831 | Net after 3 years | +$1,188 |
| Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) | Payback period | — |
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
MicroBT WhatsMiner M79$7.51/day higher profit at current rates.
Best for Home Mining
MicroBT WhatsMiner M79Score: 44/100. 50 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
MicroBT WhatsMiner M7914.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
MicroBT Whatsminer M10S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 is more profitable at $1.09/day compared to $-6.42/day for the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S or the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 is quieter at 50 dB compared to the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
MicroBT Whatsminer M10S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79: which fits a residential setup better?
The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 scores 44/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the MicroBT Whatsminer M10S). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
MicroBT Whatsminer M10S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The MicroBT Whatsminer M10S runs at 63.6 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79 runs at 14.5 J/TH — a difference of 49.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 77% better efficacité (63.6 vs 14.5 J/TH).