Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra vs Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra | Specification | Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite |
|---|---|---|
| 400.0 GH/s | Hashrate | 4.2 TH/s |
| 100 W | Power Consumption | 500 W |
| 250.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 119.1 J/TH |
| 35 dB | Noise Level | 50 dB |
| 2.5 kg | Weight | 4.0 kg |
| 341 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,706 BTU/hr |
| 71/100 | Home Mining Score | 62/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| KHeavyHash | Algorithm | KHeavyHash |
| IceRiver | Manufacturer | IceRiver |
Profitability Comparison
Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra
Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite
Based on BTC price of $78,139 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Based on our multi-factor analysis, the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite wins on 3 of 6 factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Where it pulls away hardest is 950% more hashrate (0.4 vs 4.2 TH/s). That said, the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption and home mining score and noise level. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.
Spec Deltas
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra and Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":
- Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite 950% more hashrate (0.4 vs 4.2 TH/s)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 80% better power draw (100 vs 500 W)
- Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite 52% better efficiency (250 vs 119 J/TH)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 30% better noise (35.0 vs 50.0 dB)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 38% better weight (2.5 vs 4.0 kg)
- Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite 400% more heat output (341 vs 1,706 BTU/hr)
- Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra 15% more home mining score (71.0 vs 62.0)
Cost & ROI Over Time
A miner pays for itself in profit, not specs. These projections track upfront cost against one, two and three years of net earnings at $0.10/kWh.
| Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra | Metric | Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite |
|---|---|---|
| $77 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $699 |
| -$0.23 | Daily net profit | -$1.05 |
| -$159 | Net after 1 year | -$1,082 |
| -$242 | Net after 2 years | -$1,465 |
| -$324 | Net after 3 years | -$1,848 |
| 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
Iceriver KAS KS0 UltraScore: 71/100. 35 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite119.1 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra vs Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra is more profitable at $-0.23/day compared to $-1.05/day for the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra or the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra is quieter at 35 dB compared to the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite at 50 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
Which is better for home mining, the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra or Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite?
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra scores 71/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 62/100 for the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra and Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite on J/TH?
The Iceriver KAS KS0 Ultra runs at 250.0 J/TH while the Iceriver KAS KS7 Lite runs at 119.1 J/TH — a difference of 131.0 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 52% better efficiency (250 vs 119 J/TH).