Antminer KS3 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer KS3 | Specification | Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 |
|---|---|---|
| 9.4 TH/s | Hashrate | 1,000.0 KH/s |
| 3,500 W | Power Consumption | 2,472 W |
| 372.3 J/TH | Efficiency | 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | 76 dB |
| 16.1 kg | Weight | 17.5 kg |
| 11,942 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 8,435 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 33/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| KHeavyHash | Algorithm | Randomx |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer KS3
Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9
Based on BTC price of $76,862 and current network difficulty as of May 18, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Antminer KS3 comes out ahead — it takes 5 of 6 (efficiency, hashrate, home mining score, noise level, price-performance). The standout gap is 939999900% more hashrate (9.4 vs 0.0 TH/s) in the Antminer KS3's favour. That said, the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
The Antminer KS3 and Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Antminer KS3 939999900% more hashrate (9.4 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 29% better power draw (3,500 vs 2,472 W)
- Antminer KS3 100% better efficiency (372 vs 2,472,000,000 J/TH)
- Antminer KS3 1% better noise (75.0 vs 76.0 dB)
- Antminer KS3 8% better weight (16.1 vs 17.5 kg)
- Antminer KS3 42% more heat output (11,942 vs 8,435 BTU/hr)
- Antminer KS3 9% more home mining score (36.0 vs 33.0)
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 KS3 | Metric | Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 |
|---|---|---|
| $8,000 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $5,449 |
| -$8.07 | Daily net profit | -$5.93 |
| -$10,945 | Net after 1 year | -$7,614 |
| -$13,889 | Net after 2 years | -$9,780 |
| -$16,834 | Net after 3 years | -$11,945 |
| 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 KS3Score: 36/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Antminer KS3372.3 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Antminer KS3 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 is more profitable at $-5.93/day compared to $-8.07/day for the Antminer KS3. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Antminer KS3 vs Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Antminer KS3 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 at 76 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Antminer KS3 or the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9?
The Antminer KS3 scores 36/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 33/100 for the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Antminer KS3 and Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 on J/TH?
The Antminer KS3 runs at 372.3 J/TH while the Bitmain ANTMINER XMR Miner X9 runs at 2,472,000,000.0 J/TH — a difference of 2,471,999,627.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 100% better efficiency (372 vs 2,472,000,000 J/TH).