Canaan Avalon A1566HA vs MicroBT Whatsminer M3X
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Canaan Avalon A1566HA | Specification | MicroBT Whatsminer M3X |
|---|---|---|
| 460.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 12.5 TH/s |
| 8,188 W | Power Consumption | 2,050 W |
| 17.8 J/TH | Efficiency | 164.0 J/TH |
| 80 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 20.0 kg | Weight | 7,500.0 kg |
| 27,938 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 6,995 BTU/hr |
| 23/100 | Home Mining Score | 26/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Canaan | Manufacturer | MicroBT |
Profitability Comparison
Canaan Avalon A1566HA
MicroBT Whatsminer M3X
Based on BTC price of $79,086 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Weighing six performance factors, the Canaan Avalon A1566HA comes out ahead — it takes 4 of 6 (efficiency, hashrate, noise level, price-performance). The standout gap is 3580% more hashrate (460.0 vs 12.5 TH/s) in the Canaan Avalon A1566HA's favour. That said, the MicroBT Whatsminer M3X 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
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Canaan Avalon A1566HA and MicroBT Whatsminer M3X sit on each measurable spec:
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 3580% more hashrate (460.0 vs 12.5 TH/s)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M3X 75% better power draw (8,188 vs 2,050 W)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 89% better efficiency (17.8 vs 164.0 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 100% better weight (20.0 vs 7,500.0 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A1566HA 299% more heat output (27,938 vs 6,995 BTU/hr)
- MicroBT Whatsminer M3X 13% more home mining score (23.0 vs 26.0)
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.
| Canaan Avalon A1566HA | Metric | MicroBT Whatsminer M3X |
|---|---|---|
| $5,074 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $350 |
| -$2.91 | Daily net profit | -$4.47 |
| -$6,136 | Net after 1 year | -$1,980 |
| -$7,198 | Net after 2 years | -$3,610 |
| -$8,260 | Net after 3 years | -$5,239 |
| 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
MicroBT Whatsminer M3XScore: 26/100. 0 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A1566HA17.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the Canaan Avalon A1566HA or the MicroBT Whatsminer M3X?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A1566HA is more profitable at $-2.91/day compared to $-4.47/day for the MicroBT Whatsminer M3X. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Canaan Avalon A1566HA vs MicroBT Whatsminer M3X: which runs at a lower noise level?
The Canaan Avalon A1566HA is quieter at 80 dB compared to the MicroBT Whatsminer M3X at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Canaan Avalon A1566HA vs MicroBT Whatsminer M3X: which fits a residential setup better?
The MicroBT Whatsminer M3X scores 26/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 23/100 for the Canaan Avalon A1566HA). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
Canaan Avalon A1566HA vs MicroBT Whatsminer M3X: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The Canaan Avalon A1566HA runs at 17.8 J/TH while the MicroBT Whatsminer M3X runs at 164.0 J/TH — a difference of 146.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 89% better efficiency (17.8 vs 164.0 J/TH).