Canaan Avalon A16 vs Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Canaan Avalon A16 | Specification | Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| 282.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 81.0 TH/s |
| 3,900 W | Power Consumption | 3,400 W |
| 13.8 J/TH | Efficiency | 42.0 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | — |
| 14.9 kg | Weight | 12,800.0 kg |
| 13,307 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 11,601 BTU/hr |
| 30/100 | Home Mining Score | 22/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| SHA-256 | Algorithm | SHA-256 |
| Canaan | Manufacturer | Canaan |
Profitability Comparison
Canaan Avalon A16
Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro
Based on BTC price of $78,880 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the Canaan Avalon A16 edges it: 4 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, home mining score, noise level). The standout gap is 248% more hashrate (282.0 vs 81.0 TH/s) in the Canaan Avalon A16's favour. That said, the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and price-performance. 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 A16 and Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro sit on each measurable spec:
- Canaan Avalon A16 248% more hashrate (282.0 vs 81.0 TH/s)
- Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro 13% better power draw (3,900 vs 3,400 W)
- Canaan Avalon A16 67% better efficiency (13.8 vs 42.0 J/TH)
- Canaan Avalon A16 100% better weight (14.9 vs 12,800.0 kg)
- Canaan Avalon A16 15% more heat output (13,307 vs 11,601 BTU/hr)
- Canaan Avalon A16 36% more home mining score (30.0 vs 22.0)
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.
| Canaan Avalon A16 | Metric | Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| $4,202 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $404 |
| $1.20 | Daily net profit | -$5.13 |
| -$3,765 | Net after 1 year | -$2,276 |
| -$3,329 | Net after 2 years | -$4,147 |
| -$2,892 | Net after 3 years | -$6,019 |
| Takes ~9.6 years to pay back at current rates | 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
Canaan Avalon A16$6.32/day higher profit at current rates.
Best for Home Mining
Canaan Avalon A16Score: 30/100. 75 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Canaan Avalon A1613.8 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Canaan Avalon A16 vs Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Canaan Avalon A16 is more profitable at $1.20/day compared to $-5.13/day for the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Canaan Avalon A16 or the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Canaan Avalon A16 is quieter at 75 dB compared to the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Canaan Avalon A16 vs Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro: which fits a residential setup better?
The Canaan Avalon A16 scores 30/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro). 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 Canaan Avalon A16 and Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro?
The Canaan Avalon A16 runs at 13.8 J/TH while the Canaan AvalonMiner 1166 Pro runs at 42.0 J/TH — a difference of 28.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 67% better efficiency (13.8 vs 42.0 J/TH).