Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer E9 Pro | Specification | Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) |
|---|---|---|
| 3,680.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 134.0 TH/s |
| 2,200 W | Power Consumption | 2,881 W |
| 597,826.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 21.5 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.2 kg | Weight | 14.4 kg |
| 7,506 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 9,830 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 XP (134Th/s)
Based on BTC price of $79,027 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 6 (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Its biggest concrete edge: 3641204% more hashrate (0.0 vs 134.0 TH/s). 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
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Antminer E9 Pro and Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) sit on each measurable spec:
- Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) 3641204% more hashrate (0.0 vs 134.0 TH/s)
- Antminer E9 Pro 24% better power draw (2,200 vs 2,881 W)
- Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 21.5 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 1% better weight (14.2 vs 14.4 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) 31% more heat output (7,506 vs 9,830 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 XP (134Th/s) |
|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $483 |
| -$5.28 | Daily net profit | -$2.04 |
| -$4,927 | Net after 1 year | -$1,228 |
| -$6,854 | Net after 2 years | -$1,973 |
| -$8,781 | Net after 3 years | -$2,718 |
| 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 XP (134Th/s)21.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Antminer E9 Pro or the Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s)?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) is more profitable at $-2.04/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.
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s): which runs at a lower noise level?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s): 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 XP (134Th/s)). 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 XP (134Th/s)?
The Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer S19 XP (134Th/s) runs at 21.5 J/TH — a difference of 597,804.6 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 21.5 J/TH).