Skip to main content
CME-132BDS-725 vs MS740N-HJTGB 8 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB

AE Solar CME-132BDS-725
CME-132BDS-725
725 Wp 23.37 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
MY Solar
MS740N-HJTGB
740 Wp 23.82 % HJT Bifacial Incomplete
The verdict

MS740N-HJTGB leads on the differences that matter

The largest is temperature coefficient: 0.050 %/°C better in heat. 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 CME-132BDS-725 MS740N-HJTGB Difference
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.240 %/°C 0.050 %/°C better in heat
Module efficiency 23.37 % 23.82 % 0.45 pp more efficient
Power density 233.7 Wp/m² 238.2 Wp/m² 4.6 Wp/m² higher
Rated power 725 Wp 740 Wp 15 W more power
Cell technology TOPCon HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Open-circuit voltage 49.30 V 51.35 V 2.05 V apart
Weight 37.0 kg 38.3 kg 1.3 kg lighter
Short-circuit current 18.46 A 17.95 A 0.51 A apart
Dimensions 2383x1302x30 mm 2384x1303x35 mm 2383x1302x30 mm vs 2384x1303x35 mm
Voltage at max power 41.50 V 43.25 V 1.75 V apart
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
CME-132BDS-725
24,325 kWh
MS740N-HJTGB
24,828 kWh
Lifetime gap
503 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario CME-132BDS-725 MS740N-HJTGB
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 725 W 740 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 693 W 713 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 662 W 687 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 630 W 660 W
03

Full specification

Parameter CME-132BDS-725 MS740N-HJTGB Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 725 Wp 740 Wp +15 W for MS740N-HJTGB
Module efficiency 23.37 % 23.82 % +0.45 pp for MS740N-HJTGB
Power density 233.7 Wp/m² 238.2 Wp/m² +4.6 Wp/m² for MS740N-HJTGB
Open-circuit voltage 49.30 V 51.35 V 2.05 V apart
Voltage at max power 41.50 V 43.25 V 1.75 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.46 A 17.95 A 0.51 A apart
Current at max power 17.47 A 17.13 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.240 %/°C +0.050 %/°C for MS740N-HJTGB
Mechanical
Dimensions 2383x1302x30 mm 2384x1303x35 mm 2383x1302x30 mm vs 2384x1303x35 mm
Module area 3.103 m² 3.106 m² Effectively the same
Weight 37.0 kg 38.3 kg -1.3 kg for CME-132BDS-725
Weight per kWp 51.0 kg/kWp 51.8 kg/kWp Effectively the same
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 MY Solar
Technology
Cell technology TOPCon HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 132 Same
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#930 vs #418
MS740N-HJTGB leads by 512 places
Power density
#923 vs #431
MS740N-HJTGB leads by 492 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165 vs #13
MS740N-HJTGB leads by 2,152 places
Weight
#4,382 vs #5,125
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 743 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#11 vs #3
MS740N-HJTGB leads by 8 places
05

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
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 or MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB?
According to our database: MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB has higher module efficiency (23.82% vs 23.37%); MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.240%/°C vs -0.290%/°C). 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 MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a module efficiency of 23.37%, while MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB is 23.82%. 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 MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 uses TOPCon cells; MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB uses HJT. 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 MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a 30 years power warranty; MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB 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 MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB bifacial panels?
Both AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and MY Solar MS740N-HJTGB 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.
Compare AE Solar and MY Solar as manufacturers Portfolio, efficiency, cell technologies and warranty terms

Shop prices: See 5 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.