HospedagemBlog
ProdutosSoluções em contêinerRanking de rentabilidadeHospedagemBlogSobre nósMore
CarrinhoLeedMiner

Seu carrinho está vazio

Navegue pelos produtos ou envie um pedido de orçamento quando estiver pronto.

Ver mineradores
Início/Blog/Two Solo Bitcoin Blocks in Seven Hours: What the Odds Really Mean
Voltar ao blog

Two Solo Bitcoin Blocks in Seven Hours: What the Odds Really Mean

Guia de mineração12 de novembro de 20267 min de leitura
12 de novembro de 20267 minutos de leituraAtualizado 12 de novembro de 2026

Two November 7 solo blocks paid 6.2762 BTC in gross rewards. We verify the records, calculate the odds and explain the home mining power bill.

Por LeedMiner Editorial
XFacebookLinkedIn
LeedMiner editorial cover titled Two Blocks, Same Odds, beside an illustrated home utility room

Índice

Two blocks in 6 hours 50 minutes: what the records showSolo mining odds: a rare win does not improve your next attemptBefore you plug in: electricity, fees and payout varianceKey takeaways

Compartilhar artigo

XFacebookLinkedInPinterestWhatsAppTelegram

Two Bitcoin blocks, less than seven hours apart, are enough to make any home miner stop scrolling. On November 7, 2026, blocks 974893 and 974930 produced a combined gross reward of 6.27619232 BTC. The story is remarkable. It is also easy to misread as evidence that buying a small miner has suddenly become a reliable way to make money.

The useful question is what those results tell you about your own machine. To answer it, separate three things: the reward recorded on the blockchain, the probability of finding a valid block, and the electricity bill that arrives whether you win or lose. Here is a practical reading of the event, with reproducible calculations instead of a jackpot promise.

Two blocks in 6 hours 50 minutes: what the records show

The block timestamps are 04:51:44 UTC and 11:41:44 UTC on November 7. That is a gap of exactly 6 hours 50 minutes. It measures the interval between two blocks; it does not establish when either miner switched on, how many machines were involved, or how long either participant had previously mined without a reward.

Block timestamps and gross BTC rewards for blocks 974893 and 974930, separated by 6 hours 50 minutes.
Verified block data; the utility-room background is an AI-generated editorial illustration, not a photograph of either winning setup.
BlockTimestamp, UTCGross rewardMiner payout output
974893Nov 7, 04:51:443.13350232 BTC3.07083228 BTC
974930Nov 7, 11:41:443.14269000 BTC3.07983620 BTC

These amounts come from the coinbase transactions in block 974893 and block 974930. Each gross reward includes the 3.125 BTC subsidy plus transaction fees. The second block contains 1,964 transactions, including its coinbase transaction.

Both coinbase transactions include an output to CKPool's published service address. For the second block, that output is 0.06285380 BTC, exactly 2% of the gross reward. Solo CKPool states a 2% service fee. Its solo service does not distribute small daily rewards among participants: a miner that finds no valid block receives no mining payout from that service.

A reward appearing on-chain is also different from immediately spendable money. Bitcoin's coinbase outputs are subject to a 100-block maturity rule, described in the Bitcoin developer guide. Any dollar equivalent additionally depends on the BTC price and conversion time. Gross block value is not net profit after equipment, electricity, service fees and taxes.

The blockchain does not identify a miner's hardware model or prove that it was operating in a home. A reported hashrate near a manufacturer's specification is not enough to establish that identity. For that reason, we do not label either winning setup as an Avalon Q. The Avalon Q example later in this article is a separately verified power-budget example, not a claim about who won.

Solo mining odds: a rare win does not improve your next attempt

Bitcoin mining repeatedly hashes candidate block headers, seeking a result below the network's target. It is not a queue in which a machine moves closer to its turn after each unsuccessful day. At an unchanged difficulty and hashrate, yesterday's failure does not improve today's chance. A successful hash is possible for a small miner, but possibility and a practical expectation are very different.

Annual probabilities at fixed difficulty: 0.00594% at 1.2 TH/s, 0.03216% at 6.5 TH/s, 0.42914% at 86.9 TH/s and 2.44413% at 500 TH/s.
Illustrative calculation at the November 7, 2026 difficulty, assuming continuous operation. The AI-generated cubes symbolize rarity and are not a scale diagram.

For a simple model, expected time per block is approximately difficulty × 2³² ÷ hashrate, with hashrate expressed in hashes per second. The probability of at least one block over a period is approximately 1 − exp(−time ÷ expected time). The table below uses the difficulty recorded in these two blocks: 148,364,561,003,867.4, or about 148.364561 trillion.

Constant hashrateChance of at least one block in 365 daysExpected time per block
1.2 TH/s0.00594%About 16,838 years
6.5 TH/s0.03216%About 3,109 years
86.9 TH/s0.42914%About 233 years
500 TH/s2.44413%About 40.4 years

Illustrative calculation: difficulty is held constant at the November 7 snapshot, uptime is 100%, and the model ignores rejected work, propagation losses and stale blocks. These are hashrate scenarios, not confirmed specifications of the winners. They are not a forecast of next year's network conditions. Use the LeedMiner solo mining calculator to explore different inputs, and check the difficulty timestamp before comparing results.

At 86.9 TH/s, this model gives roughly a 99.57% chance of finding no block during a year. The 233-year average is not a deadline or a promise. Even after one expected waiting time, the chance of at least one success is only about 63.2%; there remains about a 36.8% chance of none. A long unsuccessful run does not create a debt that Bitcoin must repay.

Frequent headlines can coexist with very low individual odds. If many independent miners participate, there are many opportunities for someone to succeed, and the successes attract attention. A feed of winners leaves out the much larger population still waiting. The relevant denominator is all the participating hashrate over time, not the number of exciting screenshots you encounter.

Comparing this with a lottery requires more than comparing jackpot probabilities. You would need equal spending, a consistent time period, prize values, equipment resale assumptions and operating costs. A better decision starts with your own maximum affordable loss and whether you need regular payouts.

Before you plug in: electricity, fees and payout variance

The electricity bill is much easier to estimate than the next winning block. Canaan lists the Avalon Q at 90 TH/s, 1,674 W and 18.6 J/TH, with air cooling. At that rated power, continuous operation for 30 days uses 1,205.28 kWh. This provides a concrete example without assuming that every home miner has the same energy cost.

A 1674 W machine uses 1205.28 kWh in 30 days, with electricity costs of US$96.42, US$144.63 or US$241.06 at the stated tariffs.
Illustrative electricity budget using Avalon Q rated power; excludes equipment and additional operating costs. AI-generated utility-room background.
Electricity rate30-day electricity cost
US$0.08/kWhUS$96.42
US$0.12/kWhUS$144.63
US$0.20/kWhUS$241.06

These are illustrative electricity-only costs, calculated as 1.674 kW × 24 hours × 30 days × tariff. They exclude additional cooling, networking, taxes, demand charges and equipment costs. Actual wall power varies with operating mode and conditions. Measure consumption and use your all-in local tariff. If you reduce operating hours, the power bill falls, but the number of hashing attempts falls too.

Canaan Avalon Q

Approved LeedMiner product image of the Canaan Avalon Q 90 TH/s air-cooled Bitcoin miner
Canaan Avalon Q — 90 TH/s, air cooling.

90 TH/s · Air cooling · 1,674 W · 18.6 J/TH · In stock at editorial check

View current product details

At the same fixed difficulty, a machine sustaining 90 TH/s would have about a 0.4444% chance of at least one block over a full year. That illustrates the central budgeting problem: a modest-looking monthly bill can continue while solo revenue remains zero. Do not turn the average block reward into a monthly income assumption for a single household machine.

A conventional pool changes the payout distribution by combining work and allocating rewards under its payout rules. It does not make electricity free or guarantee profitability. Compare fee structures, payout methods, minimum withdrawals and operating reliability through the mining pool directory. For pooled economics, use current inputs rather than applying a solo winner's payout to an ordinary month.

Hardware makers may benefit from increased interest after a public win, and a solo service may collect a fee when a participant finds a block. Neither fact demonstrates guaranteed profits for those businesses. The network's subsidy follows consensus rules; describing it as an advertising budget obscures how rewards are actually issued. For the buyer, the practical distinction remains whether the machine is a learning project, a discretionary hobby, or equipment expected to support a business.

Before ordering, set a budget that still works with zero solo payout, check the electrical supply and ventilation, and decide how you will monitor accepted hashrate. Write down what would make you stop, reduce hours or switch payout methods. Those decisions are more useful than choosing a machine because another owner appeared in a headline.

Key takeaways

Two valid blocks in one morning demonstrate that solo participants can succeed. They do not shorten your expected waiting time or validate a particular hardware purchase. Verify the reward, model the probability, and budget for the bills before treating a win as a reason to expand.

Planning a home mining setup? Talk to LeedMiner about the available electrical capacity, operating environment and payout approach. We can help match equipment to those constraints; no miner can guarantee your next solo block.

Posts relacionados

Physical network cabling illustrates why BTCB2 XBT and BIP110 labels must be matched to the correct chain8 de setembro de 2026BTCB2, XBT and BIP110: The Exact Names Used by NeoxEX, NonKYC and SafeTrade

See how NeoxEX, NonKYC and SafeTrade label Bitcoin BLAKE2b, why XBT is ambiguous, and how to verify the network before a

LeedMiner guide cover showing a utility substation and industrial computing facility for a discussion of Bitcoin mining as controllable grid load29 de agosto de 2026Bitcoin Mining as Flexible Load: Curtailment, Batteries and Grid Operations

Understand how controllable Bitcoin mining load differs from battery storage, then design metering, controls, restart pr

Circular energy district using thermal storage, renewable power and recovered heat24 de agosto de 2026From Waste Heat to Circular Energy: Bitcoin Mining, Thermal Storage and Grid Flexibility

How Bitcoin mining heat recovery, thermal storage and flexible operation can form an auditable circular-energy system fo

Precisa de ajuda?

Loading security check…

A Leedminer oferece preços competitivos em mineradores, acelerando seu retorno sobre investimento.

+86 133 5291 7253info@leedminer.com

Informações

  • Loja
  • Minha conta
  • Rentabilidade dos mineradores
  • Lista de moedas
  • Contagem para o halving
  • Blog

Suporte

  • Fale conosco
  • Perguntas frequentes
  • Métodos de pagamento
  • Devolução e garantia
  • Termos e condições
  • Política de privacidade

Empresa

  • Sobre nós
  • Nossa equipe
  • Feiras
  • Parceiros
  • Prevenção de fraudes
LEEDMINER

© 2017-2026 LeedMiner Todos os direitos reservados. Idioma da vitrine Português · leedminer.com

Usamos cookies para melhorar sua experiência.

Configurações de cookies

Usamos cookies essenciais para carrinho e sessões de conta. Scripts opcionais de análise e marketing só carregam após o consentimento.

Política de privacidade