Skip to content

We're upgrading our operations to serve you better. Orders ship as usual from Laval, QC. Questions? Contact us

Bitcoin accepted at checkout  |  Ships from Laval, QC, Canada  |  Expert support since 2016

Antminer D9

Antminer D9

Hashrate 1,770.0 GH/s Power 2,839 W Efficiency 1,604.0 J/TH
VS
Antminer KS5 Pro

Antminer KS5 Pro

Hashrate 21.0 TH/s Power 3,150 W Efficiency 150.0 J/TH

Antminer D9 vs Antminer KS5 Pro

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

Specifications Comparison

Antminer D9 Specification Antminer KS5 Pro
1,770.0 GH/s Hashrate 21.0 TH/s
2,839 W Power Consumption 3,150 W
1,604.0 J/TH Efficiency 150.0 J/TH
75 dB Noise Level 75 dB
16.1 kg Weight 14.5 kg
9,687 BTU/hr BTU Output 10,748 BTU/hr
36/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
X11 Algorithm KHeavyHash
Bitmain Manufacturer Bitmain

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Antminer D9

Daily Revenue 0.00000081 BTC $0.06
Daily Electricity -$6.81
Daily Profit -$6.75
Monthly -$202.50
Yearly -$2,463.73

Antminer KS5 Pro

Daily Revenue 0.00000966 BTC $0.76
Daily Electricity -$7.56
Daily Profit -$6.80
Monthly -$204.15
Yearly -$2,483.78

Based on BTC price of $78,139 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Based on our multi-factor analysis, the Antminer KS5 Pro wins on 3 of 4 factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Where it pulls away hardest is 1086% more hashrate (1.8 vs 21.0 TH/s). That said, the Antminer D9 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.

Winner: Antminer KS5 Pro — wins on 3 of 4 factors

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the Antminer D9 and Antminer KS5 Pro actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • Antminer KS5 Pro 1086% more hashrate (1.8 vs 21.0 TH/s)
  • Antminer D9 10% better power draw (2,839 vs 3,150 W)
  • Antminer KS5 Pro 91% better efficiency (1,604 vs 150 J/TH)
  • Antminer KS5 Pro 10% better weight (16.1 vs 14.5 kg)
  • Antminer KS5 Pro 11% more heat output (9,687 vs 10,748 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.

Antminer D9 Metric Antminer KS5 Pro
$3,000 Upfront cost (MSRP) $15,000
-$6.75 Daily net profit -$6.80
-$5,464 Net after 1 year -$17,484
-$7,927 Net after 2 years -$19,968
-$10,391 Net after 3 years -$22,451
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

Antminer KS5 Pro

150.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which makes more money, the Antminer D9 or the Antminer KS5 Pro?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Antminer D9 is more profitable at $-6.75/day compared to $-6.80/day for the Antminer KS5 Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Is the Antminer D9 or the Antminer KS5 Pro better for noise-sensitive spaces?

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

Which is better for home mining, the Antminer D9 or Antminer KS5 Pro?

Both miners score similarly on our Home Mining Score. Consider your specific constraints (noise tolerance, available power, heat needs) to decide.

What is the efficiency difference between Antminer D9 and Antminer KS5 Pro?

The Antminer D9 runs at 1,604.0 J/TH while the Antminer KS5 Pro runs at 150.0 J/TH — a difference of 1,454.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 91% better efficiency (1,604 vs 150 J/TH).