Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer E9 Pro | Specification | Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 3,680.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 166.0 TH/s |
| 2,200 W | Power Consumption | 3,154 W |
| 597,826.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 19.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.2 kg | Weight | 16,100.0 kg |
| 7,506 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 10,761 BTU/hr |
| 40/100 | Home Mining Score | 22/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| EtHash | Algorithm | Blake2s |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer E9 Pro
Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)
Based on BTC price of $78,221 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th), which leads on 3 of 6 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Where it pulls away hardest is 4510770% more hashrate (0.0 vs 166.0 TH/s). The Antminer E9 Pro holds the edge in 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
The Antminer E9 Pro and Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 4510770% more hashrate (0.0 vs 166.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 30% better power draw (2,200 vs 3,154 W)
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 19.0 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 100% better weight (14.2 vs 16,100.0 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) 43% more heat output (7,506 vs 10,761 BTU/hr)
- Antminer E9 Pro 82% more home mining score (40.0 vs 22.0)
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.
| Antminer E9 Pro | Metric | Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $1,399 |
| -$5.28 | Daily net profit | -$1.59 |
| -$4,927 | Net after 1 year | -$1,981 |
| -$6,854 | Net after 2 years | -$2,563 |
| -$8,781 | Net after 3 years | -$3,145 |
| 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 KA3 (166Th)19.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Antminer E9 Pro or the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) is more profitable at $-1.59/day compared to $-5.28/day for the Antminer E9 Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Antminer E9 Pro or the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Antminer E9 Pro or the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)?
The Antminer E9 Pro scores 40/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th): how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer KA3 (166Th) runs at 19.0 J/TH — a difference of 597,807.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 19.0 J/TH).