Skip to main content
AE ME-132 660W vs CME-132BDS-725 8 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

AE Solar AE ME-132 660W vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-725

AE Solar AE ME-132 660W
AE ME-132 660W
660 Wp 21.27 % PERC Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725
CME-132BDS-725
725 Wp 23.37 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

CME-132BDS-725 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 2.10 pp more efficient. 8 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 10 differences
How alike are they
8 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

10 of 18 parameters
Parameter AE ME-132 660W CME-132BDS-725 Difference
Module efficiency 21.27 % 23.37 % 2.10 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient -0.340 %/°C -0.290 %/°C 0.050 %/°C better in heat
Rated power 660 Wp 725 Wp 65 W more power
Power density 212.7 Wp/m² 233.7 Wp/m² 20.9 Wp/m² higher
Weight 31.5 kg 37.0 kg 5.5 kg lighter
Open-circuit voltage 45.90 V 49.30 V 3.40 V apart
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Weight per kWp 47.7 kg/kWp 51.0 kg/kWp 3.3 kg/kWp lighter
Voltage at max power 37.80 V 41.50 V 3.70 V apart
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
02

What it means on a roof

Thirty years of production
A 1.0% first-year loss then 0.40% a year, assumed for both panels, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year
AE ME-132 660W
22,144 kWh
CME-132BDS-725
24,325 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,181 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario AE ME-132 660W CME-132BDS-725
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 660 W 725 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 94.9% of rated power 626 W 693 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 89.8% of rated power 593 W 662 W
Hot roof 70 °C 84.7% of rated power 559 W 630 W
03

Full specification

Parameter AE ME-132 660W CME-132BDS-725 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 660 Wp 725 Wp +65 W for CME-132BDS-725
Module efficiency 21.27 % 23.37 % +2.10 pp for CME-132BDS-725
Power density 212.7 Wp/m² 233.7 Wp/m² +20.9 Wp/m² for CME-132BDS-725
Open-circuit voltage 45.90 V 49.30 V 3.40 V apart
Voltage at max power 37.80 V 41.50 V 3.70 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.43 A 18.46 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 17.46 A 17.47 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.340 %/°C -0.290 %/°C +0.050 %/°C for CME-132BDS-725
Mechanical
Dimensions 2383x1302x30 mm 2383x1302x30 mm Same
Module area 3.103 m² 3.103 m² Same
Weight 31.5 kg 37.0 kg -5.5 kg for AE ME-132 660W
Weight per kWp 47.7 kg/kWp 51.0 kg/kWp -3.3 kg/kWp for AE ME-132 660W
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation - 0.40 %/yr Not published by AE Solar
Technology
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 132 Same
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
04

Against the whole database

14,129 panels
Efficiency
#8,918 vs #968
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 7,950 places
Power density
#8,785 vs #961
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 7,824 places
Heat behaviour
#8,846 vs #2,220
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 6,626 places
Weight
#1,830 vs #4,406
AE ME-132 660W leads by 2,576 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#796 vs #11
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 785 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
AE Solar AE ME-132 660W vs AE Solar AE ME-132 655W
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
AE Solar AE ME-132 660W vs AE Solar AE ME-132 650W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AE Solar AE ME-132 660W vs AE Solar AE ME-132 645W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AE Solar AE ME-132 660W vs AE Solar AE ME-132 640W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-730
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-730W
One difference: product warranty
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: AE Solar AE ME-132 660W or AE Solar CME-132BDS-725?
According to our database: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has higher module efficiency (23.37% vs 21.27%); AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.290%/°C vs -0.340%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of AE Solar AE ME-132 660W and AE Solar CME-132BDS-725?
AE Solar AE ME-132 660 W has a module efficiency of 21.27%, while AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 is 23.37%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does AE Solar AE ME-132 660W use vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-725?
AE Solar AE ME-132 660 W uses PERC cells; AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 uses TOPCon. Modern n-type technologies (TOPCon, HJT, BC) typically deliver higher efficiency and lower degradation compared to older PERC (p-type) cells.
What is the warranty on AE Solar AE ME-132 660W and AE Solar CME-132BDS-725?
AE Solar AE ME-132 660 W has a 30 years power warranty; AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a 30 years power warranty. The power warranty guarantees a minimum percentage of rated output at the end of the warranty period (typically 80-87%). Product (materials) warranties are usually shorter.
Are AE Solar AE ME-132 660W and AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 bifacial panels?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 is bifacial (captures light from both faces); AE Solar AE ME-132 660 W is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

Shop prices: See 4 AE Solar offers

Every figure here is from the manufacturers' own datasheets - a dash means the value is not published, never an estimate. The thirty-year projection and the temperature scenarios are calculations from those figures, and each states its assumption above.