Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Specification | Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 44.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 11.0 TH/s |
| 460 W | Power Consumption | 2,820 W |
| 10,454,545.5 J/TH | Efficiency | 256.4 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 2.6 kg | Weight | 13.1 kg |
| 1,570 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 9,622 BTU/hr |
| 69/100 | Home Mining Score | 22/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Zksnark | Algorithm | Blake2b |
| Goldshell | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh
Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th)
Based on BTC price of $78,253 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Its biggest concrete edge: 24999900% more hashrate (0.0 vs 11.0 TH/s). The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh holds the edge in power consumption and home mining score and noise level. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh and Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) sit on each measurable spec:
- Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) 24999900% more hashrate (0.0 vs 11.0 TH/s)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 84% better power draw (460 vs 2,820 W)
- Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) 100% better efficiency (10,454,545 vs 256 J/TH)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 80% better weight (2.6 vs 13.1 kg)
- Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) 513% more heat output (1,570 vs 9,622 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh 214% more home mining score (69.0 vs 22.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Hardware cost is only half the story — here is how each miner's upfront price plays out against cumulative profit at a $0.10/kWh rate.
| Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh | Metric | Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $120 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $430 |
| -$1.10 | Daily net profit | -$6.37 |
| -$523 | Net after 1 year | -$2,756 |
| -$926 | Net after 2 years | -$5,081 |
| -$1,329 | Net after 3 years | -$7,407 |
| 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 Pro 44MhScore: 69/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th)256.4 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh is more profitable at $-1.10/day compared to $-6.37/day for the Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th): which runs at a lower noise level?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh vs Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th): which fits a residential setup better?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh scores 69/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh and Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) on J/TH?
The Goldshell AE-BOX Pro 44Mh runs at 10,454,545.5 J/TH while the Goldshell SC5 Pro (11Th) runs at 256.4 J/TH — a difference of 10,454,289.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficiency (10,454,545 vs 256 J/TH).