Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) vs Antminer E9 Pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) | Specification | Antminer E9 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 1.3 TH/s | Hashrate | 3,680.0 MH/s |
| 3,148 W | Power Consumption | 2,200 W |
| 2,447.9 J/TH | Efficiency | 597,826.1 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 75 dB |
| 14,200.0 kg | Weight | 14.2 kg |
| 10,741 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 7,506 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 40/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| X11 | Algorithm | EtHash |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh)
Antminer E9 Pro
Based on BTC price of $77,929 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Its biggest concrete edge: 34846% more hashrate (1.3 vs 0.0 TH/s). That said, the Antminer E9 Pro isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins 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
The Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) and Antminer E9 Pro diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) 34846% more hashrate (1.3 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 30% better power draw (3,148 vs 2,200 W)
- Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) 100% better efficiency (2,448 vs 597,826 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 100% better weight (14,200.0 vs 14.2 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) 43% more heat output (10,741 vs 7,506 BTU/hr)
- Antminer E9 Pro 82% more home mining score (22.0 vs 40.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) | Metric | Antminer E9 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| $2,595 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $3,000 |
| -$7.51 | Daily net profit | -$5.28 |
| -$5,336 | Net after 1 year | -$4,927 |
| -$8,077 | Net after 2 years | -$6,854 |
| -$10,817 | Net after 3 years | -$8,781 |
| 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
Antminer E9 ProScore: 40/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh)2,447.9 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) vs Antminer E9 Pro: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Antminer E9 Pro is more profitable at $-5.28/day compared to $-7.51/day for the Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) vs Antminer E9 Pro: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) or the Antminer E9 Pro?
The Antminer E9 Pro scores 40/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh)). 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 Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) and Antminer E9 Pro?
The Bitmain Antminer D7 (1286Gh) runs at 2,447.9 J/TH while the Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH — a difference of 595,378.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficiency (2,448 vs 597,826 J/TH).