Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) vs Goldshell E-DG1M
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) | Specification | Goldshell E-DG1M |
|---|---|---|
| 17.0 GH/s | Hashrate | 3.4 GH/s |
| 3,570 W | Power Consumption | 1,800 W |
| 210,000.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 529,411.8 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | 45 dB |
| 13.5 kg | Weight | 16.0 kg |
| 12,181 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 6,142 BTU/hr |
| 30/100 | Home Mining Score | 56/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Scrypt | Algorithm | Scrypt |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh)
Goldshell E-DG1M
Based on BTC price of $78,217 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) comes out ahead — it takes 3 of 6 (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Where it pulls away hardest is 400% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s). The Goldshell E-DG1M claws back ground on power consumption and home mining score and noise level. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) and Goldshell E-DG1M actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) 400% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Goldshell E-DG1M 50% better power draw (3,570 vs 1,800 W)
- Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) 60% better efficiency (210,000 vs 529,412 J/TH)
- Goldshell E-DG1M 40% better noise (75.0 vs 45.0 dB)
- Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) 16% better weight (13.5 vs 16.0 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) 98% more heat output (12,181 vs 6,142 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell E-DG1M 87% more home mining score (30.0 vs 56.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
Hardware cost is only half the story — here is how each miner's upfront price plays out against cumulative profit at a $0.10/kWh rate.
| Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) | Metric | Goldshell E-DG1M |
|---|---|---|
| $3,380 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $799 |
| -$8.57 | Daily net profit | -$4.32 |
| -$6,507 | Net after 1 year | -$2,376 |
| -$9,634 | Net after 2 years | -$3,953 |
| -$12,761 | Net after 3 years | -$5,529 |
| 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
Goldshell E-DG1MScore: 56/100. 45 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh)210,000.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) vs Goldshell E-DG1M: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell E-DG1M is more profitable at $-4.32/day compared to $-8.57/day for the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) or Goldshell E-DG1M?
The Goldshell E-DG1M is quieter at 45 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) or the Goldshell E-DG1M?
The Goldshell E-DG1M scores 56/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh)). 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 Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) and Goldshell E-DG1M?
The Bitmain Antminer L9 (17Gh) runs at 210,000.0 J/TH while the Goldshell E-DG1M runs at 529,411.8 J/TH — a difference of 319,411.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 60% better efficiency (210,000 vs 529,412 J/TH).