Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) vs Whatsminer M50S++
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) | Specification | Whatsminer M50S++ |
|---|---|---|
| 11.5 TH/s | Hashrate | 160.0 TH/s |
| 1,450 W | Power Consumption | 3,520 W |
| 126.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 22.0 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 75 dB |
| 3,800.0 kg | Weight | 13.5 kg |
| 4,947 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 12,010 BTU/hr |
| 31/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th)
Whatsminer M50S++
Based on BTC price of $79,235 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Based on our multi-factor analysis, the Whatsminer M50S++ wins on 4 of 6 factors (efficiency, hashrate, noise level, price-performance). Its biggest concrete edge: 1291% more hashrate (11.5 vs 160.0 TH/s). That said, the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and home mining score. 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 T9 (11.5Th) and Whatsminer M50S++ actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Whatsminer M50S++ 1291% more hashrate (11.5 vs 160.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) 59% better power draw (1,450 vs 3,520 W)
- Whatsminer M50S++ 83% better efficiency (126.1 vs 22.0 J/TH)
- Whatsminer M50S++ 100% better weight (3,800.0 vs 13.5 kg)
- Whatsminer M50S++ 143% more heat output (4,947 vs 12,010 BTU/hr)
- Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) 3% more home mining score (31.0 vs 30.0)
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.
| Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) | Metric | Whatsminer M50S++ |
|---|---|---|
| $955 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $4,000 |
| -$3.05 | Daily net profit | -$2.43 |
| -$2,067 | Net after 1 year | -$4,888 |
| -$3,180 | Net after 2 years | -$5,775 |
| -$4,292 | Net after 3 years | -$6,663 |
| 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
Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th)Score: 31/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Whatsminer M50S++22.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) or the Whatsminer M50S++?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Whatsminer M50S++ is more profitable at $-2.43/day compared to $-3.05/day for the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) or the Whatsminer M50S++ better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Whatsminer M50S++ is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) 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 T9 (11.5Th) or the Whatsminer M50S++?
The Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) scores 31/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 30/100 for the Whatsminer M50S++). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) and Whatsminer M50S++ on J/TH?
The Bitmain Antminer T9 (11.5Th) runs at 126.1 J/TH while the Whatsminer M50S++ runs at 22.0 J/TH — a difference of 104.1 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 83% better efficiency (126.1 vs 22.0 J/TH).