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

Jasminer X16-Q

Jasminer X16-Q

Taux de hachage 1,950.0 MH/s Puissance 620 W Efficiency 317,948.7 J/TH
VS
Jasminer X16-QE

Jasminer X16-QE

Taux de hachage 1.8 GH/s Puissance 550 W Efficiency 314,285.7 J/TH

Jasminer X16-Q vs Jasminer X16-QE

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

Specifications Comparison

Jasminer X16-Q Specification Jasminer X16-QE
1,950.0 MH/s Taux de hachage 1.8 GH/s
620 W Consommation électrique 550 W
317,948.7 J/TH Efficiency 314,285.7 J/TH
40 dB Niveau de bruit 40 dB
Weight 10.0 kg
2,115 BTU/hr BTU Output 1,877 BTU/hr
65/100 Home Mining Score 65/100
Release Year
EtHash Algorithme EtHash
Jasminer Manufacturer Jasminer

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Jasminer X16-Q

Daily Revenue 0.00000000 BTC $0.00
Daily Electricity -$1.49
Daily Profit -$1.49
Monthly -$44.64
Yearly -$543.09

Jasminer X16-QE

Daily Revenue 0.00000000 BTC $0.00
Daily Electricity -$1.32
Daily Profit -$1.32
Monthly -$39.60
Yearly -$481.78

Based on BTC price of $78,237 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Weighing six performance factors, the Jasminer X16-QE comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 3 (efficacité, consommation électrique, rapport qualité-prix). Where it pulls away hardest is 11% better power draw (620 vs 550 W). The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.

Winner: Jasminer X16-QE — l'emporte sur 3 des 3 facteurs

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Jasminer X16-Q and Jasminer X16-QE sit on each measurable spec:

  • Jasminer X16-Q 11% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 11% better power draw (620 vs 550 W)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 1% better efficacité (317,949 vs 314,286 J/TH)
  • Jasminer X16-Q 13% more heat output (2,115 vs 1,877 BTU/hr)

Cost & ROI Over Time

A miner pays for itself in profit, not specs. These projections track upfront cost against one, two and three years of net earnings at $0.10/kWh.

Jasminer X16-Q Metric Jasminer X16-QE
$789 Upfront cost (MSRP) $469
-$1.49 Daily net profit -$1.32
-$1,332 Net after 1 year -$951
-$1,875 Net after 2 years -$1,433
-$2,418 Net after 3 years -$1,914
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

Jasminer X16-QE

314,285.7 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the Jasminer X16-Q or Jasminer X16-QE more profitable?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Jasminer X16-QE is more profitable at $-1.32/day compared to $-1.49/day for the Jasminer X16-Q. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the Jasminer X16-Q or the Jasminer X16-QE better for noise-sensitive spaces?

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

Jasminer X16-Q vs Jasminer X16-QE: 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.

Jasminer X16-Q vs Jasminer X16-QE: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The Jasminer X16-Q runs at 317,948.7 J/TH while the Jasminer X16-QE runs at 314,285.7 J/TH — a difference of 3,663.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 1% better efficacité (317,949 vs 314,286 J/TH).