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

Whatsminer M50S

Whatsminer M50S

Hashrate 126.0 TH/s Power 3,276 W Efficiency 26.0 J/TH
VS

MicroBT WhatsMiner M70

Hashrate 236.0 TH/s Power 3,422 W Efficiency 14.5 J/TH

Whatsminer M50S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M70

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

Specifications Comparison

Whatsminer M50S Specification MicroBT WhatsMiner M70
126.0 TH/s Hashrate 236.0 TH/s
3,276 W Power Consumption 3,422 W
26.0 J/TH Efficiency 14.5 J/TH
75 dB Noise Level 75 dB
12.8 kg Weight 13.5 kg
11,178 BTU/hr BTU Output 11,676 BTU/hr
36/100 Home Mining Score 36/100
Release Year
SHA-256 Algorithm SHA-256
MicroBT Manufacturer MicroBT

Profitability Comparison

$/kWh

Whatsminer M50S

Daily Revenue 0.00005798 BTC $4.59
Daily Electricity -$7.86
Daily Profit -$3.27
Monthly -$98.20
Yearly -$1,194.81

MicroBT WhatsMiner M70

Daily Revenue 0.00010860 BTC $8.60
Daily Electricity -$8.21
Daily Profit $0.38
Monthly $11.47
Yearly $139.57

Based on BTC price of $79,143 and current network difficulty as of May 15, 2026. Actual results vary.

Verdict

Our scoring model gives the nod to the MicroBT WhatsMiner M70, which leads on 2 of 3 weighted factors (efficiency, hashrate). The standout gap is 87% more hashrate (126 vs 236 TH/s) in the MicroBT WhatsMiner M70's favour. The Whatsminer M50S claws back ground on power consumption. Cross-check the spec deltas and ROI table above against your own electricity rate before deciding.

Winner: MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 — wins on 2 of 3 factors

Spec Deltas

Here is every spec where the Whatsminer M50S and MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 actually differ, with the gap quantified:

  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 87% more hashrate (126 vs 236 TH/s)
  • Whatsminer M50S 4% better power draw (3,276 vs 3,422 W)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 44% better efficiency (26.0 vs 14.5 J/TH)
  • Whatsminer M50S 5% better weight (12.8 vs 13.5 kg)
  • MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 4% more heat output (11,178 vs 11,676 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.

Whatsminer M50S Metric MicroBT WhatsMiner M70
$3,200 Upfront cost (MSRP)
-$3.27 Daily net profit $0.38
-$4,395 Net after 1 year +$140
-$5,590 Net after 2 years +$279
-$6,784 Net after 3 years +$419
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

MicroBT WhatsMiner M70

$3.66/day higher profit at current rates.

Best for Home Mining

Tie

Both miners are equally suitable for home use.

Best for Efficiency

MicroBT WhatsMiner M70

14.5 J/TH — lower electricity cost per terahash.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which makes more money, the Whatsminer M50S or the MicroBT WhatsMiner M70?

At the current BTC price and a $0.10/kWh electricity rate, the MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 is more profitable at $0.38/day compared to $-3.27/day for the Whatsminer M50S. Profitability depends heavily on your electricity rate — use the selector above to calculate with your actual costs.

Which is quieter, the Whatsminer M50S or MicroBT WhatsMiner M70?

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

Which is better for home mining, the Whatsminer M50S or MicroBT WhatsMiner M70?

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

Whatsminer M50S vs MicroBT WhatsMiner M70: how much does the efficiency gap matter?

The Whatsminer M50S runs at 26.0 J/TH while the MicroBT WhatsMiner M70 runs at 14.5 J/TH — a difference of 11.5 J/TH. Lower efficiency means less electricity per terahash of mining power, directly reducing operating costs. In relative terms that is 44% better efficiency (26.0 vs 14.5 J/TH).