AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 vs Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT
VS
The verdict
13 differences, and they point both ways
The largest is temperature coefficient: 0.030 %/°C better in heat. 6 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 13 differencesHow alike are they
6
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
13 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
CME-132BDS-725
GSD8K66H-735WT
Difference
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
0.030 %/°C better in heat
Product warranty
30 yrs
25 yrs
5 yrs longer
Module efficiency
23.37 %
23.66 %
0.29 pp more efficient
Weight
37.0 kg
39.0 kg
2.0 kg lighter
Cell technology
TOPCon
HJT
TOPCon vs HJT
Open-circuit voltage
49.30 V
51.50 V
2.20 V apart
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.35 %/yr
0.05 %/yr slower
Rated power
725 Wp
735 Wp
10 W more power
Weight per kWp
51.0 kg/kWp
53.1 kg/kWp
2.0 kg/kWp lighter
Short-circuit current
18.46 A
17.72 A
0.74 A apart
Voltage at max power
41.50 V
43.60 V
2.10 V apart
Dimensions
2383x1302x30 mm
2384x1303x35 mm
2383x1302x30 mm vs 2384x1303x35 mm
Current at max power
17.47 A
16.87 A
0.60 A apart
02
What it means on a roof
Thirty years of production
Each panel's own declared degradation curve, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year
CME-132BDS-725
24,325 kWh
GSD8K66H-735WT
24,853 kWh
Lifetime gap
528 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
CME-132BDS-725
GSD8K66H-735WT
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
725 W
735 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
693 W
706 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
662 W
678 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
630 W
649 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
CME-132BDS-725
GSD8K66H-735WT
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
725 Wp
735 Wp
+10 W for GSD8K66H-735WT
Module efficiency
23.37 %
23.66 %
+0.29 pp for GSD8K66H-735WT
Power density
233.7 Wp/m²
236.6 Wp/m²
Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage
49.30 V
51.50 V
2.20 V apart
Voltage at max power
41.50 V
43.60 V
2.10 V apart
Short-circuit current
18.46 A
17.72 A
0.74 A apart
Current at max power
17.47 A
16.87 A
0.60 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
+0.030 %/°C for GSD8K66H-735WT
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
39.0 kg
-2.0 kg for CME-132BDS-725
Weight per kWp
51.0 kg/kWp
53.1 kg/kWp
-2.0 kg/kWp for CME-132BDS-725
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
30 yrs
25 yrs
+5 yrs for CME-132BDS-725
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.35 %/yr
-0.05 %/yr for GSD8K66H-735WT
Technology
Cell technology
TOPCon
HJT
TOPCon vs HJT
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
132
132
Same
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#930
vs
#602
GSD8K66H-735WT leads by 328 places
Power density
#923
vs
#582
GSD8K66H-735WT leads by 341 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165
vs
#511
GSD8K66H-735WT leads by 1,654 places
Weight
#4,382
vs
#6,818
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 2,436 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#11
vs
#21
CME-132BDS-725 leads by 10 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT?
According to our database: Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT has higher module efficiency (23.66% vs 23.37%); Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.260%/°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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a module efficiency of 23.37%, while Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT is 23.66%. 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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 uses TOPCon cells; Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT 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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT?
AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 has a 30 years power warranty; Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT 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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT bifacial panels?
Both AE Solar CME-132BDS-725 and Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT 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 5 AE Solar offers · See 6 Sharp 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.