Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer E9 Pro | Specification | Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 3,680.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 56.0 TH/s |
| 2,200 W | Power Consumption | 2,520 W |
| 597,826.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 45.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.2 kg | Weight | 9,500.0 kg |
| 7,506 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 8,598 BTU/hr |
| 40/100 | Home Mining Score | 22/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| EtHash | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer E9 Pro
Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th)
Based on BTC price of $79,029 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 1521639% more hashrate (0.0 vs 56.0 TH/s) in the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th)'s favour. That said, the Antminer E9 Pro isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and home mining score and noise level. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Antminer E9 Pro and Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) sit on each measurable spec:
- Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) 1521639% more hashrate (0.0 vs 56.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 13% better power draw (2,200 vs 2,520 W)
- Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 45.0 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 100% better weight (14.2 vs 9,500.0 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) 15% more heat output (7,506 vs 8,598 BTU/hr)
- Antminer E9 Pro 82% more home mining score (40.0 vs 22.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Sticker price versus what the miner actually earns back: the table below projects cumulative net profit at a $0.10/kWh electricity rate.
| Antminer E9 Pro | Metric | Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $413 |
| -$5.28 | Daily net profit | -$4.01 |
| -$4,927 | Net after 1 year | -$1,877 |
| -$6,854 | Net after 2 years | -$3,341 |
| -$8,781 | Net after 3 years | -$4,805 |
| 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 S17 (56Th)45.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Antminer E9 Pro or Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) is more profitable at $-4.01/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 S17 (56Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th): which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer E9 Pro scores 40/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th)). 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 Antminer E9 Pro and Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th)?
The Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer S17 (56Th) runs at 45.0 J/TH — a difference of 597,781.1 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 45.0 J/TH).