Welcome to the next crypto level
← Nexorena

Bitcoin

Bitcoin hashrate returns to a zettahash despite miners pivoting to AI

Bitcoin's computing power average has returned to around 1 ZH/s. This recovery increases competition among miners, as some operators convert their sites to artificial intelligence.

Bitcoin hashrate returns to a zettahash despite miners pivoting to AI — original conceptual illustration

A recovering computing average

Bitcoin's estimated computing power has returned to a seven-day average close to one zettahash per second, according to Miner Weekly, cited by Bitcoin.com News. This level is equivalent to one thousand exahashes per second. The report describes a return to a level already observed, not necessarily an absolute historical record. The hashrate is not directly measured on all machines: it is estimated from the blocks produced. Its reading therefore depends on the duration chosen to smooth out fluctuations.

Miners perform calculations to propose blocks compliant with Bitcoin rules. Higher total power translates to more available computing on the network, but does not mean each participant receives more bitcoins. Rewards are distributed according to blocks found and the modalities of the pools used. When competition increases, a given machine represents a smaller share of the total if its own power remains identical. Network activity and an operator's revenue therefore do not progress automatically together.

Difficulty adjusts the competition

The report recalls a 5.92% increase in mining difficulty on October 16. This difficulty sets the conditions a block must satisfy to be accepted. Its periodic adjustment responds to the observed production rate. An estimate of the next variation can evolve as long as the period is not finished; it should not be presented as an increase already applied. The speed of future blocks remains necessary to know the adjustment actually retained by the protocol.

For a miner, economic parameters include the bitcoin price, equipment efficiency, electricity price, and operating costs. A difficulty increase can weigh on expected revenues for the same installed power. It does not, by itself, inform on the profitability of each site. Two installations using comparable machines can encounter very different conditions depending on their energy contracts, financing, and availability. The global hashrate must therefore be linked to the operator's own constraints.

Capabilities changing usage

Some major mining groups are converting infrastructure to computing intended for artificial intelligence. Miner Weekly highlights that these departures are not enough to prevent the recovery of total hashrate. Other actors are developing their capacities, and equipment can be resold and installed elsewhere. The departure of a site does not therefore necessarily permanently remove its machines from the network. On the other hand, conversion work and energy commitments for AI can permanently modify the use of the concerned installation.

Capacity announcements finally deserve to be distinguished from actually exploited power. An order of machines, an electrical connection, and observed production do not correspond to the same stage. Similarly, a commercial link between two actors does not prove the exact origin of a lot of used equipment. The return to a zettahash illustrates the network's ability to attract or put back into service computing; it does not demonstrate that all miners benefit economically from this recovery.

Written with love byEthan BrooksMeet this editorial pen name ↗

Explorer Nexorena