Goldshell AE-BOX II vs Goldshell KA BOX Pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE-BOX II | Specification | Goldshell KA BOX Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 54.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 1.6 TH/s |
| 530 W | Power Consumption | 600 W |
| 9,814,814.8 J/TH | Efficiency | 375.0 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Noise Level | 55 dB |
| 3.0 kg | Weight | 2.6 kg |
| 1,808 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 2,047 BTU/hr |
| 65/100 | Home Mining Score | 58/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithm | KHeavyHash |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE-BOX II
Goldshell KA BOX Pro
Based on BTC price of $78,162 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Goldshell KA BOX Pro edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 2962863% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.6 TH/s) in the Goldshell KA BOX Pro's favour. The Goldshell AE-BOX II claws back ground on power consumption and home mining score and noise level. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell AE-BOX II and Goldshell KA BOX Pro sit on each measurable spec:
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 2962863% more hashrate (0.0 vs 1.6 TH/s)
- Goldshell AE-BOX II 12% better power draw (530 vs 600 W)
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 100% better efficiency (9,814,815 vs 375 J/TH)
- Goldshell AE-BOX II 36% better noise (35.0 vs 55.0 dB)
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 12% better weight (3.0 vs 2.6 kg)
- Goldshell KA BOX Pro 13% more heat output (1,808 vs 2,047 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE-BOX II 12% more home mining score (65.0 vs 58.0)
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.
| Goldshell AE-BOX II | Metric | Goldshell KA BOX Pro |
|---|---|---|
| $120 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $129 |
| -$1.27 | Daily net profit | -$1.38 |
| -$584 | Net after 1 year | -$634 |
| -$1,049 | Net after 2 years | -$1,138 |
| -$1,513 | Net after 3 years | -$1,643 |
| 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
Goldshell AE-BOX IIScore: 65/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell KA BOX Pro375.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Goldshell AE-BOX II vs Goldshell KA BOX Pro: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell AE-BOX II is more profitable at $-1.27/day compared to $-1.38/day for the Goldshell KA BOX Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Goldshell AE-BOX II or the Goldshell KA BOX Pro better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Goldshell KA BOX Pro at 55 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Goldshell AE-BOX II or the Goldshell KA BOX Pro?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II scores 65/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 58/100 for the Goldshell KA BOX Pro). 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 Goldshell AE-BOX II and Goldshell KA BOX Pro?
The Goldshell AE-BOX II runs at 9,814,814.8 J/TH while the Goldshell KA BOX Pro runs at 375.0 J/TH — a difference of 9,814,439.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficiency (9,814,815 vs 375 J/TH).