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

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72

Taux de hachage 262.0 TH/s Puissance 3,799 W Efficiency 14.5 J/TH
VS

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

Taux de hachage 980.0 TH/s Puissance 13,230 W Efficiency 13.5 J/TH

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

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

Specifications Comparison

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 Specification MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S
262.0 TH/s Taux de hachage 980.0 TH/s
3,799 W Consommation électrique 13,230 W
14.5 J/TH Efficiency 13.5 J/TH
75 dB Niveau de bruit 50 dB
25.5 kg Weight 37.0 kg
12,962 BTU/hr BTU Output 45,141 BTU/hr
30/100 Home Mining Score 44/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithme SHA-256
MicroBT Manufacturer MicroBT

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72

Daily Revenue 0.00012057 BTC $9.42
Daily Electricity -$9.12
Daily Profit $0.30
Monthly $9.06
Yearly $110.28

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

Daily Revenue 0.00045098 BTC $35.23
Daily Electricity -$31.75
Daily Profit $3.48
Monthly $104.46
Yearly $1,270.98

Based on BTC price of $78,128 and current network difficulty as of May 17, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 5 (efficacité, hashrate, score de minage domestique, niveau sonore). The standout gap is 274% more hashrate (262 vs 980 TH/s) in the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S's favour. The MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 claws back ground on consommation électrique. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S — l'emporte sur 4 des 5 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 and MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S 274% more hashrate (262 vs 980 TH/s)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 71% better power draw (3,799 vs 13,230 W)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S 7% better efficacité (14.5 vs 13.5 J/TH)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S 33% better noise (75.0 vs 50.0 dB)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 31% better weight (25.5 vs 37.0 kg)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S 248% more heat output (12,962 vs 45,141 BTU/hr)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S 47% more score de minage domestique (30.0 vs 44.0)

Best For...

Best for Profitability

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

$3.18/day higher profit at current rates.

Best for Home Mining

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

Score: 44/100. 50 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S

13.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S is more profitable at $3.48/day compared to $0.30/day for the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S: which runs at a lower noise level?

The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S is quieter at 50 dB compared to the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.

MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S: which fits a residential setup better?

The MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S scores 44/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the MicroBT WhatsMiner M72). 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 M72 and MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S?

The MicroBT WhatsMiner M72 runs at 14.5 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M79S runs at 13.5 J/TH — a difference of 1.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 7% better efficacité (14.5 vs 13.5 J/TH).