Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) vs Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) | Specification | Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) |
|---|---|---|
| 20.5 TH/s | Hashrate | 40.0 TH/s |
| 1,530 W | Power Consumption | 2,200 W |
| 74.6 J/TH | Efficiency | 55.0 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | — |
| 6,500.0 kg | Weight | 11,500.0 kg |
| 5,220 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 7,506 BTU/hr |
| 28/100 | Home Mining Score | 26/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Bitmain |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th)
Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)
Based on BTC price of $79,091 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th), which leads on 2 of 4 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate). Where it pulls away hardest is 95% more hashrate (20.5 vs 40.0 TH/s). That said, the Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) 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
The Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) and Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) 95% more hashrate (20.5 vs 40.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) 30% better power draw (1,530 vs 2,200 W)
- Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) 26% better efficiency (74.6 vs 55.0 J/TH)
- Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) 43% better weight (6,500 vs 11,500 kg)
- Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) 44% more heat output (5,220 vs 7,506 BTU/hr)
- Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) 8% more home mining score (28.0 vs 26.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) | Metric | Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $155 |
| -$2.93 | Daily net profit | -$3.82 |
| -$1,068 | Net after 1 year | -$1,551 |
| -$2,136 | Net after 2 years | -$2,947 |
| -$3,204 | Net after 3 years | -$4,342 |
| — | 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
Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th)Score: 28/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)55.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) vs Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th): which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) is more profitable at $-2.93/day compared to $-3.82/day for the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) or the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) better for noise-sensitive spaces?
Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) or the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)?
The Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) scores 28/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 26/100 for the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)). 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 S11 (20.5Th) and Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th)?
The Bitmain Antminer S11 (20.5Th) runs at 74.6 J/TH while the Bitmain Antminer T17 (40Th) runs at 55.0 J/TH — a difference of 19.6 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 26% better efficiency (74.6 vs 55.0 J/TH).