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

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster

Hashrate 4.3 TH/s Power 1,350 W Efficiency 314.0 J/TH
VS
Obelisk SC1 Dual

Obelisk SC1 Dual

Hashrate 1.1 TH/s Power 900 W Efficiency 818.2 J/TH

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster vs Obelisk SC1 Dual

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

Specifications Comparison

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster Specification Obelisk SC1 Dual
4.3 TH/s Hashrate 1.1 TH/s
1,350 W Power Consumption 900 W
314.0 J/TH Efficiency 818.2 J/TH
Noise Level
3,700.0 kg Weight
4,606 BTU/hr BTU Output 3,071 BTU/hr
31/100 Home Mining Score 31/100
Release Year
Blake2b Algorithm Blake2b
Innosilicon Manufacturer Obelisk

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster

Daily Revenue 0.00000198 BTC $0.15
Daily Electricity -$3.24
Daily Profit -$3.09
Monthly -$92.55
Yearly -$1,126.08

Obelisk SC1 Dual

Daily Revenue 0.00000051 BTC $0.04
Daily Electricity -$2.16
Daily Profit -$2.12
Monthly -$63.61
Yearly -$773.94

Based on BTC price of $78,257 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Run the numbers across every spec and the Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster edges it: 2 of 3 factors go its way (efficiency, hashrate). Where it pulls away hardest is 291% more hashrate (4.3 vs 1.1 TH/s). The Obelisk SC1 Dual claws back ground on power consumption. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.

Winner: Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster — wins on 2 of 3 factors

Spec Deltas

The Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster and Obelisk SC1 Dual diverge on the metrics below — each gap expressed as a real percentage, not a vague "better":

  • Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster 291% more hashrate (4.3 vs 1.1 TH/s)
  • Obelisk SC1 Dual 33% better power draw (1,350 vs 900 W)
  • Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster 62% better efficiency (314 vs 818 J/TH)
  • Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster 50% more heat output (4,606 vs 3,071 BTU/hr)

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.

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster Metric Obelisk SC1 Dual
$2,000 Upfront cost (MSRP)
-$3.09 Daily net profit -$2.12
-$3,126 Net after 1 year -$774
-$4,252 Net after 2 years -$1,548
-$5,378 Net after 3 years -$2,322
Does not pay back at current rates (negative daily profit) Payback period

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

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster

314.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which makes more money, the Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster or the Obelisk SC1 Dual?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Obelisk SC1 Dual is more profitable at $-2.12/day compared to $-3.09/day for the Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster or Obelisk SC1 Dual?

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

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster vs Obelisk SC1 Dual: which fits a residential setup better?

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

Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster vs Obelisk SC1 Dual: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The Innosilicon S11 SiaMaster runs at 314.0 J/TH while the Obelisk SC1 Dual runs at 818.2 J/TH — a difference of 504.2 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 62% better efficiency (314 vs 818 J/TH).