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

iPollo V2

iPollo V2

Hashrate 10.0 GH/s Power 1,500 W Efficiency 150,000.0 J/TH
VS
Jasminer X16-QE

Jasminer X16-QE

Hashrate 1.8 GH/s Power 550 W Efficiency 314,285.7 J/TH

iPollo V2 vs Jasminer X16-QE

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

Specifications Comparison

iPollo V2 Specification Jasminer X16-QE
10.0 GH/s Hashrate 1.8 GH/s
1,500 W Power Consumption 550 W
150,000.0 J/TH Efficiency 314,285.7 J/TH
75 dB Noise Level 40 dB
16.5 kg Weight 10.0 kg
5,118 BTU/hr BTU Output 1,877 BTU/hr
48/100 Home Mining Score 65/100
Release Year
EtHash Algorithm EtHash
iPollo Manufacturer Jasminer

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

iPollo V2

Daily Revenue 0.00000000 BTC $0.00
Daily Electricity -$3.60
Daily Profit -$3.60
Monthly -$107.99
Yearly -$1,313.87

Jasminer X16-QE

Daily Revenue 0.00000000 BTC $0.00
Daily Electricity -$1.32
Daily Profit -$1.32
Monthly -$39.60
Yearly -$481.78

Based on BTC price of $78,209 and current network difficulty as of May 16, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Both the iPollo V2 and Jasminer X16-QE are closely matched across our scoring factors, with neither holding a decisive advantage. Your choice should depend on your specific priorities — review the specs and profitability analysis above.

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the iPollo V2 and Jasminer X16-QE actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • iPollo V2 471% more hashrate (0.0 vs 0.0 TH/s)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 63% better power draw (1,500 vs 550 W)
  • iPollo V2 52% better efficiency (150,000 vs 314,286 J/TH)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 47% better noise (75.0 vs 40.0 dB)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 39% better weight (16.5 vs 10.0 kg)
  • iPollo V2 173% more heat output (5,118 vs 1,877 BTU/hr)
  • Jasminer X16-QE 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-QE
$5,140 Upfront cost (MSRP) $469
-$3.60 Daily net profit -$1.32
-$6,454 Net after 1 year -$951
-$7,768 Net after 2 years -$1,433
-$9,082 Net after 3 years -$1,914
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

Jasminer X16-QE

Score: 65/100. 40 dB noise level.

Best for Efficiency

iPollo V2

150,000.0 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

iPollo V2 vs Jasminer X16-QE: which one earns more per day?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the Jasminer X16-QE is more profitable at $-1.32/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-QE better for noise-sensitive spaces?

The Jasminer X16-QE 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.

Which is better for home mining, the iPollo V2 or Jasminer X16-QE?

The Jasminer X16-QE 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.

What is the efficiency difference between iPollo V2 and Jasminer X16-QE?

The iPollo V2 runs at 150,000.0 J/TH while the Jasminer X16-QE runs at 314,285.7 J/TH — a difference of 164,285.7 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 52% better efficiency (150,000 vs 314,286 J/TH).