Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer E9 Pro | Specification | Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 3,680.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 110.0 TH/s |
| 2,200 W | Power Consumption | 3,250 W |
| 597,826.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 29.6 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.2 kg | Weight | 13,200.0 kg |
| 7,506 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 11,089 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 S19 Pro (110Th)
Based on BTC price of $78,960 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Based on our multi-factor analysis, the Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) wins on 3 of 6 factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 2989030% more hashrate (0.0 vs 110.0 TH/s) in the Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th)'s favour. The Antminer E9 Pro claws back ground on 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
Here is every spec where the Antminer E9 Pro and Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) 2989030% more hashrate (0.0 vs 110.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 32% better power draw (2,200 vs 3,250 W)
- Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 29.6 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 100% better weight (14.2 vs 13,200.0 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) 48% more heat output (7,506 vs 11,089 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 S19 Pro (110Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $360 |
| -$5.28 | Daily net profit | -$3.68 |
| -$4,927 | Net after 1 year | -$1,703 |
| -$6,854 | Net after 2 years | -$3,045 |
| -$8,781 | Net after 3 years | -$4,388 |
| 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 S19 Pro (110Th)29.6 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Antminer E9 Pro or Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) is more profitable at $-3.68/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 S19 Pro (110Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th): 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 S19 Pro (110Th)). 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 S19 Pro (110Th)?
The Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer S19 Pro (110Th) runs at 29.6 J/TH — a difference of 597,796.5 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 29.6 J/TH).