iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner vs Goldshell SC Box II
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner | Specification | Goldshell SC Box II |
|---|---|---|
| 19.0 TH/s | Hashrate | 1.9 TH/s |
| 3,100 W | Power Consumption | 400 W |
| 163.2 J/TH | Efficiency | 210.5 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | 35 dB |
| 14.0 kg | Weight | 2.3 kg |
| 10,577 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,365 BTU/hr |
| 36/100 | Home Mining Score | 69/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| Blake2b-sia | Algorithm | Blake2b-sia |
| iBeLink | Manufacturer | Goldshell |
Profitability Comparison
iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner
Goldshell SC Box II
Based on BTC price of $76,982 and current network difficulty as of May 18, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner, which leads on 3 of 6 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 900% more hashrate (19.0 vs 1.9 TH/s) in the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner's favour. The Goldshell SC Box II claws back ground on 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
Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner and Goldshell SC Box II sit on each measurable spec:
- iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner 900% more hashrate (19.0 vs 1.9 TH/s)
- Goldshell SC Box II 87% better power draw (3,100 vs 400 W)
- iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner 23% better efficiency (163 vs 211 J/TH)
- Goldshell SC Box II 53% better noise (75.0 vs 35.0 dB)
- Goldshell SC Box II 84% better weight (14.0 vs 2.3 kg)
- iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner 675% more heat output (10,577 vs 1,365 BTU/hr)
- Goldshell SC Box II 92% more home mining score (36.0 vs 69.0)
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-S3 Siacoin Miner | Metric | Goldshell SC Box II |
|---|---|---|
| $1,330 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $379 |
| -$6.77 | Daily net profit | -$0.89 |
| -$3,800 | Net after 1 year | -$705 |
| -$6,270 | Net after 2 years | -$1,031 |
| -$8,740 | Net after 3 years | -$1,356 |
| 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 SC Box IIScore: 69/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner163.2 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Which makes more money, the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner or the Goldshell SC Box II?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell SC Box II is more profitable at $-0.89/day compared to $-6.77/day for the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner or the Goldshell SC Box II better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Goldshell SC Box II is quieter at 35 dB compared to the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner or Goldshell SC Box II?
The Goldshell SC Box II scores 69/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 36/100 for the iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner vs Goldshell SC Box II: how much does the efficiency gap matter?
The iBeLink BM-S3 Siacoin Miner runs at 163.2 J/TH while the Goldshell SC Box II runs at 210.5 J/TH — a difference of 47.4 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 23% better efficiency (163 vs 211 J/TH).