iBeLink BM-N3 Max vs Goldshell CK-BOX
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-N3 Max | Specification | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| 30.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 1.1 TH/s |
| 3,300 W | Power Consumption | 215 W |
| 110.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 204.8 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | 45 dB |
| 6.6 kg | Weight | 2.0 kg |
| 11,260 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 734 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 59/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithm | Eaglesong |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-N3 Max
Goldshell CK-BOX
Based on BTC price of $78,257 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Based on our multi-factor analysis, the iBeLink BM-N3 Max wins on 2 of 5 factors (efficiency, hashrate). Where it pulls away hardest is 2757% more hashrate (30.0 vs 1.1 TH/s). That said, the Goldshell CK-BOX isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and home mining score and noise level. The right pick still depends on your power cost and noise tolerance — the breakdowns above make that call concrete.
Spec Deltas
Here is every spec where the iBeLink BM-N3 Max and Goldshell CK-BOX actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 2757% more hashrate (30.0 vs 1.1 TH/s)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 93% better power draw (3,300 vs 215 W)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 46% better efficiency (110 vs 205 J/TH)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 40% better noise (75.0 vs 45.0 dB)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 70% better weight (6.6 vs 2.0 kg)
- iBeLink BM-N3 Max 1435% more heat output (11,260 vs 734 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 64% more home mining score (36.0 vs 59.0)
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.
| iBeLink BM-N3 Max | Metric | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| — | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $399 |
| -$6.84 | Daily net profit | -$0.48 |
| -$2,496 | Net after 1 year | -$574 |
| -$4,993 | Net after 2 years | -$748 |
| -$7,489 | Net after 3 years | -$923 |
| — | 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
Goldshell CK-BOXScore: 59/100. 45 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iBeLink BM-N3 Max110.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
iBeLink BM-N3 Max vs Goldshell CK-BOX: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell CK-BOX is more profitable at $-0.48/day compared to $-6.84/day for the iBeLink BM-N3 Max. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the iBeLink BM-N3 Max or the Goldshell CK-BOX better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Goldshell CK-BOX is quieter at 45 dB compared to the iBeLink BM-N3 Max at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the iBeLink BM-N3 Max or Goldshell CK-BOX?
The Goldshell CK-BOX scores 59/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 36/100 for the iBeLink BM-N3 Max). 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 iBeLink BM-N3 Max and Goldshell CK-BOX?
The iBeLink BM-N3 Max runs at 110.0 J/TH while the Goldshell CK-BOX runs at 204.8 J/TH — a difference of 94.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 46% better efficiency (110 vs 205 J/TH).