iPollo V2 vs Jasminer X16-Q pro
Side-by-side specs, profitability, and home mining comparison.
Specifications Comparison
| iPollo V2 | Specification | Jasminer X16-Q pro |
|---|---|---|
| 10.0 GH/s | Hashrate | 2.1 GH/s |
| 1,500 W | Power Consumption | 520 W |
| 150,000.0 J/TH | Efficiency | 253,658.5 J/TH |
| 75 dB | Noise Level | 40 dB |
| 16.5 kg | Weight | 10.0 kg |
| 5,118 BTU/hr | BTU Output | 1,774 BTU/hr |
| 48/100 | Home Mining Score | 65/100 |
| — | Release Year | — |
| EtHash | Algorithm | EtHash |
| iPollo | Manufacturer | Jasminer |
Profitability Comparison
iPollo V2
Jasminer X16-Q pro
Based on BTC price of $78,186 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.
Verdict
Our scoring model gives the nod to the iPollo V2, which leads on 3 of 6 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate, price-performance). Where it pulls away hardest is 388% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s). That said, the Jasminer X16-Q pro isn't beaten everywhere — it still wins 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
Here is every spec where the iPollo V2 and Jasminer X16-Q pro actually differ, with the gap quantified:
- iPollo V2 388% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
- Jasminer X16-Q pro 65% better power draw (1,500 vs 520 W)
- iPollo V2 41% better efficiency (150,000 vs 253,659 J/TH)
- Jasminer X16-Q pro 47% better noise (75.0 vs 40.0 dB)
- Jasminer X16-Q pro 39% better weight (16.5 vs 10.0 kg)
- iPollo V2 188% more heat output (5,118 vs 1,774 BTU/hr)
- Jasminer X16-Q pro 35% more home mining score (48.0 vs 65.0)
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.
| iPollo V2 | Metric | Jasminer X16-Q pro |
|---|---|---|
| $5,140 | Upfront cost (MSRP) | $1,249 |
| -$3.60 | Daily net profit | -$1.25 |
| -$6,454 | Net after 1 year | -$1,704 |
| -$7,768 | Net after 2 years | -$2,160 |
| -$9,082 | Net after 3 years | -$2,615 |
| 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
Jasminer X16-Q proScore: 65/100. 40 dB noise level.
Best for Efficiency
iPollo V2150,000.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.
Frequently Asked Questions
iPollo V2 vs Jasminer X16-Q pro: which one earns more per day?
At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Jasminer X16-Q pro is more profitable at $-1.25/day compared to $-3.60/day for the iPollo V2. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.
Is the iPollo V2 or the Jasminer X16-Q pro better for noise-sensitive spaces?
The Jasminer X16-Q pro is quieter at 40 dB compared to the iPollo V2 at 75 dB. For home mining, lower noise levels make a significant difference in livability.
For mining at home, should I pick the iPollo V2 or the Jasminer X16-Q pro?
The Jasminer X16-Q pro scores 65/100 on our Home Mining Score (vs 48/100 for the iPollo V2). This composite score factors in noise, power requirements, heat output, size, and setup ease — all critical for residential mining.
How far apart are the iPollo V2 and Jasminer X16-Q pro on J/TH?
The iPollo V2 runs at 150,000.0 J/TH while the Jasminer X16-Q pro runs at 253,658.5 J/TH — a difference of 103,658.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 41% better efficiency (150,000 vs 253,659 J/TH).