AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw
VS
The verdict
A800-GRH78Dw leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 1.60 pp more efficient. 4 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.
See all 14 differencesHow alike are they
4
of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
not published
01
14 of 18 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
A465-MCE54Mb
A800-GRH78Dw
Difference
Module efficiency
23.30 %
24.90 %
1.60 pp more efficient
Rated power
465 Wp
800 Wp
335 W more power
Power density
232.7 Wp/m²
249.1 Wp/m²
16.4 Wp/m² higher
Weight
21.0 kg
39.8 kg
18.8 kg lighter
Product warranty
25 yrs
15 yrs
10 yrs longer
Open-circuit voltage
40.50 V
59.32 V
18.82 V apart
Short-circuit current
14.64 A
17.06 A
2.42 A apart
Module area
1.998 m²
3.212 m²
1.214 m² apart
Weight per kWp
45.2 kg/kWp
49.7 kg/kWp
4.6 kg/kWp lighter
Voltage at max power
33.90 V
49.36 V
15.46 V apart
Current at max power
13.72 A
16.21 A
2.49 A apart
Cell count
108
156
48 cells apart
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
2465x1303x33 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 2465x1303x33 mm
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
Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.260 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
A465-MCE54Mb
15,602 kWh
A800-GRH78Dw
26,842 kWh
Lifetime gap
11,240 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
A465-MCE54Mb
A800-GRH78Dw
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
465 W
800 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
96.1% of rated power
447 W
769 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
92.2% of rated power
429 W
738 W
Hot roof
70 °C
88.3% of rated power
411 W
706 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
A465-MCE54Mb
A800-GRH78Dw
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
465 Wp
800 Wp
+335 W for A800-GRH78Dw
Module efficiency
23.30 %
24.90 %
+1.60 pp for A800-GRH78Dw
Power density
232.7 Wp/m²
249.1 Wp/m²
+16.4 Wp/m² for A800-GRH78Dw
Open-circuit voltage
40.50 V
59.32 V
18.82 V apart
Voltage at max power
33.90 V
49.36 V
15.46 V apart
Short-circuit current
14.64 A
17.06 A
2.42 A apart
Current at max power
13.72 A
16.21 A
2.49 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
2465x1303x33 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 2465x1303x33 mm
Module area
1.998 m²
3.212 m²
1.214 m² apart
Weight
21.0 kg
39.8 kg
-18.8 kg for A465-MCE54Mb
Weight per kWp
45.2 kg/kWp
49.7 kg/kWp
-4.6 kg/kWp for A465-MCE54Mb
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
25 yrs
15 yrs
+10 yrs for A465-MCE54Mb
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.35 %/yr
-
Not published by AIKO
Technology
Cell technology
Back Contact
Back Contact
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
108
156
48 cells apart
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#1,017
vs
#10
A800-GRH78Dw leads by 1,007 places
Power density
#1,115
vs
#10
A800-GRH78Dw leads by 1,105 places
Heat behaviour
#511
vs
#511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#622
vs
#3,214
A465-MCE54Mb leads by 2,592 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,631
vs
#2
A800-GRH78Dw leads by 4,629 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A485-MCE54Mb
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A480-MCE54Mb
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A475-MCE54Mb
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A470-MCE54Mb
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb vs AIKO AIKO-A460-MCE54Mb
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw vs AIKO AIKO-A805-GRH78Dw
One difference: module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb or AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw?
According to our database: AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw has higher module efficiency (24.90% vs 23.30%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb and AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb has a module efficiency of 23.30%, while AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw is 24.90%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb use vs AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb uses Back Contact cells; AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw uses Back Contact. 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 AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb and AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb has a 30 years power warranty; AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw 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 AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb and AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw bifacial panels?
AIKO AIKO-A800-GRH78Dw is bifacial (captures light from both faces); AIKO AIKO-A465-MCE54Mb is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.
Shop prices: See 181 AIKO 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.