E9 Pro and L7. Despite differing algorithms, the machines' costs vary by a factor of 1.7, while their profit potentials differ by 1.3.

Algorithmic disparities make long-term profit forecasting a challenge. My friend invested in the Abyss model six months ago, witnessing ASIC's robust performance over an extended period, yet growth remained elusive. This dilemma placed them at a crossroads: Is this investment truly worthwhile? Given the lower and upcoming halving of SHA-256's returns, they opted to steer clear of SHA-256.

While E9 Pro might be an option, L7 has already undergone halving, making the S series appear the only feasible choice currently. However, attention

If profit potential is the sole concern, it's advisable to wait for the arrival of the L9 model before taking action. I am curious about L7's potential, speculating whether it can reach around 9300 to a hopeful 9500 range. Amidst this, doubts have arisen about L9's qualifications, piquing curiosity.

L7's power consumption, ranging from 3.1 to 3.2 kilowatts, seems to have become a thing of the past; its prime might have already passed. Miners' words are filled with caution as they assert this to be a mirage. With the LTC halving impending, they anticipate L7's price to drop within a month, with an investment payback period of fewer than 300 days. Embracing risk is urged, as the situation continues to evolve.

The potential entry of L9 into the Russian Federation or the possibility of L7 eventually becoming obsolete showcases the dynamic nature of mining decisions. Notably, 2/3 of profits are attributed to DOGE's overmining, minimizing concerns over LTC's halving impact.

Moreover, second-hand mining machines might currently alleviate the significant financial budget I have in mind for my future plans.