Skip to content

We're upgrading our operations to serve you better. Orders ship as usual from Laval, QC. Questions? Contact us

Bitcoin accepted at checkout  |  Ships from Laval, QC, Canada  |  Expert support since 2016

Goldshell KD-BOX

Goldshell KD-BOX

Hashrate 1.6 TH/s Power 205 W Efficiency 128.1 J/TH
VS
Goldshell KD-BOX Pro

Goldshell KD-BOX Pro

Hashrate 2.6 TH/s Power 230 W Efficiency 88.5 J/TH

Goldshell KD-BOX vs Goldshell KD-BOX Pro

Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.

Specifications Comparison

Goldshell KD-BOX Specification Goldshell KD-BOX Pro
1.6 TH/s Hashrate 2.6 TH/s
205 W Power Consumption 230 W
128.1 J/TH Efficiency 88.5 J/TH
Noise Level
Weight 2,000.0 kg
700 BTU/hr BTU Output 785 BTU/hr
31/100 Home Mining Score 31/100
Release Year
Blake2s Algorithm Blake2s
Goldshell Manufacturer Goldshell

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Goldshell KD-BOX

Daily Revenue 0.00000074 BTC $0.06
Daily Electricity -$0.49
Daily Profit -$0.43
Monthly -$13.03
Yearly -$158.56

Goldshell KD-BOX Pro

Daily Revenue 0.00000120 BTC $0.09
Daily Electricity -$0.55
Daily Profit -$0.46
Monthly -$13.75
Yearly -$167.32

Based on BTC price of $78,217 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Run the numbers across every spec and the Goldshell KD-BOX Pro edges it: 3 of 4 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). The standout gap is 63% more hashrate (1.6 vs 2.6 TH/s) in the Goldshell KD-BOX Pro's favour. That said, the Goldshell KD-BOX isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins power consumption. Review the detailed specs and profitability calculations above to determine which miner best fits your specific setup.

Winner: Goldshell KD-BOX Pro — wins on 3 of 4 factors

Spec Deltas

Stripped to the numbers, this is how far apart the Goldshell KD-BOX and Goldshell KD-BOX Pro sit on each measurable spec:

  • Goldshell KD-BOX Pro 63% more hashrate (1.6 vs 2.6 TH/s)
  • Goldshell KD-BOX 11% better power draw (205 vs 230 W)
  • Goldshell KD-BOX Pro 31% better efficiency (128.1 vs 88.5 J/TH)
  • Goldshell KD-BOX Pro 12% more heat output (700 vs 785 BTU/hr)

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.

Goldshell KD-BOX Metric Goldshell KD-BOX Pro
$330 Upfront cost (MSRP) $278
-$0.43 Daily net profit -$0.46
-$489 Net after 1 year -$445
-$647 Net after 2 years -$613
-$806 Net after 3 years -$780
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

Tie

Both miners produce similar daily profit.

Best for Home Mining

Tie

Both miners are equally suitable for home use.

Best for Efficiency

Goldshell KD-BOX Pro

88.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Goldshell KD-BOX vs Goldshell KD-BOX Pro: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Goldshell KD-BOX is more profitable at $-0.43/day compared to $-0.46/day for the Goldshell KD-BOX Pro. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the Goldshell KD-BOX or Goldshell KD-BOX Pro?

Both miners have similar noise levels. Check the specs table above for exact decibel readings.

Which is better for home mining, the Goldshell KD-BOX or Goldshell KD-BOX Pro?

Both miners score similarly on our Home Mining Score. Consider your specific constraints (noise tolerance, available power, heat needs) to decide.

Goldshell KD-BOX vs Goldshell KD-BOX Pro: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The Goldshell KD-BOX runs at 128.1 J/TH while the Goldshell KD-BOX Pro runs at 88.5 J/TH — a difference of 39.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 31% better efficiency (128.1 vs 88.5 J/TH).