Antminer Loki Edition (S9) vs Auradine Teraflux AI3680
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Antminer Loki Edition (S9) | Specification | Auradine Teraflux AI3680 |
|---|---|---|
| 14.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 375.0 TH/s |
| 1,350 W | Power Consumption | 5,625 W |
| 96.4 J/TH | Efficiency | 15.0 J/TH |
| 55 dB | Noise Level | 55 dB |
| 6.0 kg | Weight | — |
| 4,606 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 19,193 BTU/hr |
| 59/100 | Home Mining Score | — |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| D-Central | Manufacturer | Auradine |
Profitability Comparison
Antminer Loki Edition (S9)
Auradine Teraflux AI3680
Based on BTC price of $77,713 and current network difficulty as of May 21, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Auradine Teraflux AI3680 edges it: 2 of 4 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate). Where it pulls away hardest is 2579% more hashrate (14.0 vs 375.0 TH/s). That said, the Antminer Loki Edition (S9) isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and home mining score. 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 Loki Edition (S9) and Auradine Teraflux AI3680 actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Auradine Teraflux AI3680 2579% more hashrate (14.0 vs 375.0 TH/s)
- Antminer Loki Edition (S9) 76% better power draw (1,350 vs 5,625 W)
- Auradine Teraflux AI3680 84% better efficiency (96.4 vs 15.0 J/TH)
- Auradine Teraflux AI3680 317% more heat output (4,606 vs 19,193 BTU/hr)
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 Loki Edition (S9) | Metric | Auradine Teraflux AI3680 |
|---|---|---|
| $349 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$2.74 | Daily net profit | -$0.09 |
| -$1,349 | Net after 1 year | -$33 |
| -$2,349 | Net after 2 years | -$65 |
| -$3,349 | Net after 3 years | -$98 |
| Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) | Payback period | — |
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 Loki Edition (S9)Score: 59/100. 55 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Auradine Teraflux AI368015.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Antminer Loki Edition (S9) or Auradine Teraflux AI3680 more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Auradine Teraflux AI3680 is more profitable at $-0.09/day compared to $-2.74/day for the Antminer Loki Edition (S9). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Antminer Loki Edition (S9) or the Auradine Teraflux AI3680 better for noise-sensitive spaces?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
Antminer Loki Edition (S9) vs Auradine Teraflux AI3680: which fits a residential setup better?
The Antminer Loki Edition (S9) scores 59/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 0/100 for the Auradine Teraflux AI3680). 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 Loki Edition (S9) and Auradine Teraflux AI3680?
The Antminer Loki Edition (S9) runs at 96.4 J/TH while the Auradine Teraflux AI3680 runs at 15.0 J/TH — a difference of 81.4 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 84% better efficiency (96.4 vs 15.0 J/TH).