Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) vs Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) | Specification | Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T |
|---|---|---|
| 23.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 218.0 TH/s |
| 1,541 W | Power Consumption | 3,662 W |
| 67.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 16.8 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 75 dB |
| 6,600.0 kg | Weight | 14.9 kg |
| 5,258 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 12,495 BTU/hr |
| 28/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Canaan |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th)
Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T
Based on BTC price of $79,143 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 5 (efficiency, hashrate, home mining score, noise level). The standout gap is 848% more hashrate (23.0 vs 218.0 TH/s) in the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T's favour. That said, the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) 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
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) and Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T sit on each measurable spec:
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T 848% more hashrate (23.0 vs 218.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) 58% better power draw (1,541 vs 3,662 W)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T 75% better efficiency (67.0 vs 16.8 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T 100% better weight (6,600.0 vs 14.9 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T 138% more heat output (5,258 vs 12,495 BTU/hr)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T 7% more home mining score (28.0 vs 30.0)
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 T15 (23Th) | Metric | Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $2,525 |
| -$2.86 | Daily net profit | -$0.85 |
| -$1,044 | Net after 1 year | -$2,835 |
| -$2,088 | Net after 2 years | -$3,145 |
| -$3,133 | Net after 3 years | -$3,455 |
| — | 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
Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218TScore: 30/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T16.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) or Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T more profitable?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T is more profitable at $-0.85/day compared to $-2.86/day for the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Which is quieter, the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) or Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T?
The Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) vs Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T: which fits a residential setup better?
The Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T scores 30/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 28/100 for the Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th)). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) vs Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Bitmain Antminer T15 (23Th) runs at 67.0 J/TH while the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-218T runs at 16.8 J/TH — a difference of 50.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 75% better efficiency (67.0 vs 16.8 J/TH).