Skip to main content
A470-MAH54Mw vs A775-GRH78Dw 4 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw

AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw
AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw
470 Wp 23.60 % Back Contact
VS
AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw
AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw
775 Wp 24.10 % Back Contact Bifacial Incomplete
The verdict

14 differences, and they point both ways

The largest is rated power: 305 W more power. 4 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 14 differences
How alike are they
4 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

14 of 18 parameters
Parameter A470-MAH54Mw A775-GRH78Dw Difference
Rated power 470 Wp 775 Wp 305 W more power
Module efficiency 23.60 % 24.10 % 0.50 pp more efficient
Weight 21.5 kg 39.8 kg 18.3 kg lighter
Product warranty 25 yrs 15 yrs 10 yrs longer
Weight per kWp 45.7 kg/kWp 51.4 kg/kWp 5.6 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage 41.18 V 58.82 V 17.64 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.32 A 16.71 A 2.39 A apart
Module area 1.992 m² 3.212 m² 1.219 m² apart
Power density 235.9 Wp/m² 241.3 Wp/m² 5.4 Wp/m² higher
Voltage at max power 34.74 V 48.87 V 14.13 V apart
Current at max power 13.54 A 15.86 A 2.32 A apart
Cell count 108 156 48 cells apart
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
Dimensions 1757x1134x30 mm 2465x1303x33 mm 1757x1134x30 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.
A470-MAH54Mw
15,769 kWh
A775-GRH78Dw
26,003 kWh
Lifetime gap
10,234 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario A470-MAH54Mw A775-GRH78Dw
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 470 W 775 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 96.1% of rated power 452 W 745 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 92.2% of rated power 433 W 715 W
Hot roof 70 °C 88.3% of rated power 415 W 684 W
03

Full specification

Parameter A470-MAH54Mw A775-GRH78Dw Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 470 Wp 775 Wp +305 W for A775-GRH78Dw
Module efficiency 23.60 % 24.10 % +0.50 pp for A775-GRH78Dw
Power density 235.9 Wp/m² 241.3 Wp/m² +5.4 Wp/m² for A775-GRH78Dw
Open-circuit voltage 41.18 V 58.82 V 17.64 V apart
Voltage at max power 34.74 V 48.87 V 14.13 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.32 A 16.71 A 2.39 A apart
Current at max power 13.54 A 15.86 A 2.32 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.260 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 1757x1134x30 mm 2465x1303x33 mm 1757x1134x30 mm vs 2465x1303x33 mm
Module area 1.992 m² 3.212 m² 1.219 m² apart
Weight 21.5 kg 39.8 kg -18.3 kg for A470-MAH54Mw
Weight per kWp 45.7 kg/kWp 51.4 kg/kWp -5.6 kg/kWp for A470-MAH54Mw
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 25 yrs 15 yrs +10 yrs for A470-MAH54Mw
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

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#627 vs #219
A775-GRH78Dw leads by 408 places
Power density
#657 vs #227
A775-GRH78Dw leads by 430 places
Heat behaviour
#511 vs #511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#860 vs #4,724
A470-MAH54Mw leads by 3,864 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,119 vs #30
A775-GRH78Dw leads by 4,089 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A485-MAH54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A480-MAH54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A475-MAH54Mw
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A465-MAH54Mw
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A460-MAH54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A455-MAH54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw or AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw?
According to our database: AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw has higher module efficiency (24.10% vs 23.60%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw and AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw has a module efficiency of 23.60%, while AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw is 24.10%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw use vs AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw uses Back Contact cells; AIKO AIKO-A775-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-A470-MAH54Mw and AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw?
AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw has a 30 years power warranty; AIKO AIKO-A775-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-A470-MAH54Mw and AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw bifacial panels?
AIKO AIKO-A775-GRH78Dw is bifacial (captures light from both faces); AIKO AIKO-A470-MAH54Mw 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.