iBeLink BM-N3 vs Goldshell CK-BOX
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-N3 | Specification | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| 25.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 1.1 TH/s |
| 3,300 W | Power Consumption | 215 W |
| 132.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 204.8 J/TH |
| — | Noise Level | 45 dB |
| — | Weight | 2.0 kg |
| 11,260 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 734 BTU/hr |
| 22/100 | Home Mining Score | 59/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Eaglesong | Algorithm | Eaglesong |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-N3
Goldshell CK-BOX
Based on BTC price of $78,178 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Run the numbers across every spec and the iBeLink BM-N3 edges it: 3 of 6 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 2281% more hashrate (25.0 vs 1.1 TH/s) in the iBeLink BM-N3's favour. The Goldshell CK-BOX holds the edge in 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
The iBeLink BM-N3 and Goldshell CK-BOX diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- iBeLink BM-N3 2281% more hashrate (25.0 vs 1.1 TH/s)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 93% better power draw (3,300 vs 215 W)
- iBeLink BM-N3 36% better efficiency (132 vs 205 J/TH)
- iBeLink BM-N3 1435% more heat output (11,260 vs 734 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell CK-BOX 168% more home mining score (22.0 vs 59.0)
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.
| iBeLink BM-N3 | Metric | Goldshell CK-BOX |
|---|---|---|
| $980 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $399 |
| -$7.02 | Daily net profit | -$0.48 |
| -$3,543 | Net after 1 year | -$574 |
| -$6,105 | Net after 2 years | -$748 |
| -$8,668 | Net after 3 years | -$923 |
| 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
Goldshell CK-BOXScore: 59/100. 45 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iBeLink BM-N3132.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
iBeLink BM-N3 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 $-7.02/day for the iBeLink BM-N3. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the iBeLink BM-N3 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 at 0 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
iBeLink BM-N3 vs Goldshell CK-BOX: which fits a residential setup better?
The Goldshell CK-BOX scores 59/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 22/100 for the iBeLink BM-N3). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the iBeLink BM-N3 and Goldshell CK-BOX on J/TH?
The iBeLink BM-N3 runs at 132.0 J/TH while the Goldshell CK-BOX runs at 204.8 J/TH — a difference of 72.8 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 36% better efficiency (132 vs 205 J/TH).