Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) vs Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) | Specification | Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T |
|---|---|---|
| 12.5 TH/s | Hashrate | 215.0 TH/s |
| 1,576 W | Power Consumption | 3,612 W |
| 126.1 J/TH | Efficiency | 16.8 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 75 dB |
| 3,800.0 kg | Weight | 14.9 kg |
| 5,377 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 12,324 BTU/hr |
| 28/100 | Home Mining Score | 30/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Bitmain | Manufacturer | Canaan |
Profitability Comparison
Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th)
Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T
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 Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T, which leads on 4 of 5 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate, home mining score, noise level). Its biggest concrete edge: 1620% more hashrate (12.5 vs 215.0 TH/s). The Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) claws back ground on power consumption. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) and Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T 1620% more hashrate (12.5 vs 215.0 TH/s)
- Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) 56% better power draw (1,576 vs 3,612 W)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T 87% better efficiency (126.1 vs 16.8 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T 100% better weight (3,800.0 vs 14.9 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T 129% more heat output (5,377 vs 12,324 BTU/hr)
- Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T 7% more home mining score (28.0 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 (12.5Th) | Metric | Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T |
|---|---|---|
| $1,100 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | — |
| -$3.33 | Daily net profit | -$0.84 |
| -$2,315 | Net after 1 year | -$308 |
| -$3,529 | Net after 2 years | -$616 |
| -$4,744 | Net after 3 years | -$924 |
| 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 A15Pro-215TScore: 30/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T16.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) or the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T is more profitable at $-0.84/day compared to $-3.33/day for the Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th). Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) vs Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) 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 (12.5Th) or the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T?
The Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T scores 30/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 28/100 for the Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th)). 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 (12.5Th) and Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T on J/TH?
The Bitmain Antminer T9 (12.5Th) runs at 126.1 J/TH while the Canaan Avalon A15Pro-215T runs at 16.8 J/TH — a difference of 109.3 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 87% better efficiency (126.1 vs 16.8 J/TH).