Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) vs Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) | Specification | Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T |
|---|---|---|
| 13.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 500.0 TH/s |
| 1,280 W | Power Consumption | 8,400 W |
| 98.5 J/TH | Efficiency | 16.8 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 40 dB |
| 4,200.0 kg | Weight | 20.0 kg |
| 4,367 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 28,661 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 51/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Canaan |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th)
Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T
Based on BTC price of $79,091 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T edges it: 4 of 5 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, home mining score, noise level). The standout gap is 3746% more hashrate (13.0 vs 500.0 TH/s) in the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T's favour. The Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) holds the edge in power consumption. 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 S9i (13Th) and Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T 3746% more hashrate (13.0 vs 500.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) 85% better power draw (1,280 vs 8,400 W)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T 83% better efficiency (98.5 vs 16.8 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T 100% better weight (4,200.0 vs 20.0 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T 556% more heat output (4,367 vs 28,661 BTU/hr)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T 65% more home mining score (31.0 vs 51.0)
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 S9i (13Th) | Metric | Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T |
|---|---|---|
| $65 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$2.60 | Daily net profit | -$1.96 |
| -$1,014 | Net after 1 year | -$716 |
| -$1,962 | Net after 2 years | -$1,432 |
| -$2,911 | Net after 3 years | -$2,148 |
| 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
Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500TScore: 51/100. 40 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T16.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) or the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T is more profitable at $-1.96/day compared to $-2.60/day for the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) or Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T?
The Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T is quieter at 40 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) or the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T?
The Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T scores 51/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 31/100 for the Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th)). 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 S9i (13Th) and Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T?
The Bitmain Antminer S9i (13Th) runs at 98.5 J/TH while the Canaan Avalon A1566HA 500T runs at 16.8 J/TH — a difference of 81.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 83% better efficiency (98.5 vs 16.8 J/TH).