CME-132BDS-725 vs CMD-108BDE-415W 6 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W

Q: Which panel is better: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 or AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

According to our database: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has higher module efficiency (23.37% vs 21.28%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.

Q: What is the efficiency of AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a module efficiency of 23.37%, while AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W is 21.28%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.

Q: What cell technology does AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 use vs AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 uses TOPCon cells; AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W uses TOPCon. Modern n-type technologies (TOPCon, HJT, BC) typically deliver higher efficiency and lower degradation compared to older PERC (p-type) cells.

Q: What is the warranty on AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a 30 years power warranty; AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W 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.

Q: Are AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W bifacial panels?

Both AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W are bifacial - they capture reflected light from the ground, which can add 5-15% more annual energy on ground-mount or elevated rooftop installations with a light surface beneath.

CME-132BDS-725

725 Wp 23.37 % TOPCon Bifacial

Open panel page Datasheet PDF

CMD-108BDE-415W

415 Wp 21.28 % TOPCon Bifacial Incomplete

Open panel page Datasheet PDF

The verdict

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

The largest is module efficiency: 2.09 pp more efficient. 6 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 12 differences

How alike are they

6 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical

identical differs not published

What actually differs

12 of 18 parameters

Parameter CME-132BDS-725 CMD-108BDE-415W Difference

Module efficiency 23.37 % 21.28 % 2.09 pp more efficient

Rated power 725 Wp 415 Wp 310 W more power

Power density 233.7 Wp/m² 212.8 Wp/m² 20.8 Wp/m² higher

Weight 37.0 kg 23.5 kg 13.5 kg lighter

Weight per kWp 51.0 kg/kWp 56.6 kg/kWp 5.6 kg/kWp lighter

Open-circuit voltage 49.30 V 37.86 V 11.44 V apart

Short-circuit current 18.46 A 13.70 A 4.76 A apart

Module area 3.103 m² 1.950 m² 1.153 m² apart

Voltage at max power 41.50 V 32.04 V 9.46 V apart

Current at max power 17.47 A 12.95 A 4.52 A apart

Cell count 132 108 24 cells apart

Dimensions 2383x1302x30 mm 1721x1133x30 mm 2383x1302x30 mm vs 1721x1133x30 mm

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

Cell temperature

Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.290 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.

CME-132BDS-725

24,325 kWh

CMD-108BDE-415W

13,924 kWh

Lifetime gap

10,401 kWh

Output when it is hot

Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees

Scenario CME-132BDS-725 CMD-108BDE-415W

Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 725 W 415 W

Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 693 W 397 W

Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 662 W 379 W

Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 630 W 361 W

Full specification

Parameter CME-132BDS-725 CMD-108BDE-415W Difference

Power and efficiency

Rated power 725 Wp 415 Wp +310 W for CME-132BDS-725

Module efficiency 23.37 % 21.28 % +2.09 pp for CME-132BDS-725

Power density 233.7 Wp/m² 212.8 Wp/m² +20.8 Wp/m² for CME-132BDS-725

Open-circuit voltage 49.30 V 37.86 V 11.44 V apart

Voltage at max power 41.50 V 32.04 V 9.46 V apart

Short-circuit current 18.46 A 13.70 A 4.76 A apart

Current at max power 17.47 A 12.95 A 4.52 A apart

Temperature

Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.290 %/°C Same

Mechanical

Dimensions 2383x1302x30 mm 1721x1133x30 mm 2383x1302x30 mm vs 1721x1133x30 mm

Module area 3.103 m² 1.950 m² 1.153 m² apart

Weight 37.0 kg 23.5 kg -13.5 kg for CMD-108BDE-415W

Weight per kWp 51.0 kg/kWp 56.6 kg/kWp -5.6 kg/kWp for CME-132BDS-725

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 TOPCon TOPCon Same

Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same

Cell count 132 108 24 cells apart

Bifacial Yes Yes Same

Against the whole database

14,005 panels

Efficiency

#930 vs #8,795

CME-132BDS-725 leads by 7,865 places

Power density

#923 vs #8,625

CME-132BDS-725 leads by 7,702 places

Heat behaviour

#2,165 vs #2,165

Tied - the same position in the database

Weight

#4,382 vs #10,752

CME-132BDS-725 leads by 6,370 places

Warranty

#21 vs #21

Tied - the same position in the database

Overall

#11 vs #7,969

CME-132BDS-725 leads by 7,958 places

More useful comparisons

Open the full database

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

Same series, other bin

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

One difference: product warranty

Same series, other bin

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-720

The same specification on paper

Same series, other bin

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-720W

One difference: product warranty

Same series, other bin

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs AE Solar CME-132BDS-715

3 differences, the largest is module efficiency

Written summary

Checking cache...

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 or AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

According to our database: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has higher module efficiency (23.37% vs 21.28%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.

What is the efficiency of AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a module efficiency of 23.37%, while AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415 W is 21.28%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.

What cell technology does AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 use vs AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 uses TOPCon cells; AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415 W 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 CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W?

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a 30 years power warranty; AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415 W 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 CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415W bifacial panels?

Both AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and AE Solar CMD-108BDE-415 W are bifacial - they capture reflected light from the ground, which can add 5-15% more annual energy on ground-mount or elevated rooftop installations with a light surface beneath.

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.