Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer E9 Pro | Specification | Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 3,680.0 MH/s | Hashrate | 11.5 TH/s |
| 2,200 W | Power Consumption | 1,127 W |
| 597,826.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 98.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.2 kg | Weight | 4,200.0 kg |
| 7,506 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 3,845 BTU/hr |
| 40/100 | Home Mining Score | 31/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| EtHash | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer E9 Pro
Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th)
Based on BTC price of $79,027 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Based on our multi-factor analysis, the Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) wins on 4 of 6 factors (efficiency, hashrate, power consumption, price-performance). Its biggest concrete edge: 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 98.0 J/TH). That said, the Antminer E9 Pro isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins 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 S9 (11.5Th) sit on each measurable spec:
- Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) 312400% more hashrate (0.0 vs 11.5 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) 49% better power draw (2,200 vs 1,127 W)
- Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) 100% better efficiency (597,826.1 vs 98.0 J/TH)
- Antminer E9 Pro 100% better weight (14.2 vs 4,200.0 kg)
- Antminer E9 Pro 95% more heat output (7,506 vs 3,845 BTU/hr)
- Antminer E9 Pro 29% more home mining score (40.0 vs 31.0)
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 S9 (11.5Th) |
|---|---|---|
| $3,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $65 |
| -$5.28 | Daily net profit | -$2.29 |
| -$4,927 | Net after 1 year | -$900 |
| -$6,854 | Net after 2 years | -$1,734 |
| -$8,781 | Net after 3 years | -$2,569 |
| 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 S9 (11.5Th)98.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Antminer E9 Pro vs Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) is more profitable at $-2.29/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 S9 (11.5Th): which runs at a lower noise level?
The Antminer E9 Pro is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) 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 S9 (11.5Th)?
The Antminer E9 Pro scores 40/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th)). 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 S9 (11.5Th)?
The Antminer E9 Pro runs at 597,826.1 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer S9 (11.5Th) runs at 98.0 J/TH — a difference of 597,728.1 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 98.0 J/TH).