AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
VS
Heckert Solar
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
490 Wp
24.00 %
Back Contact
Bifacial
The verdict
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 0.50 pp more efficient. 10 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 9 differencesHow alike are they
10
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
9 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
Difference
Module efficiency
24.50 %
24.00 %
0.50 pp more efficient
Product warranty
15 yrs
30 yrs
15 yrs longer
Weight per kWp
42.9 kg/kWp
50.6 kg/kWp
7.8 kg/kWp lighter
Weight
21.0 kg
24.8 kg
3.8 kg lighter
Annual degradation
0.35 %/yr
0.45 %/yr
0.10 %/yr slower
Power density
245.2 Wp/m²
240.1 Wp/m²
5.2 Wp/m² higher
Module area
1.998 m²
2.041 m²
0.043 m² apart
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
1800x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 1800x1134x30 mm
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
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.
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
16,568 kWh
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
16,136 kWh
Lifetime gap
432 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
490 W
490 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
96.1% of rated power
471 W
471 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
92.2% of rated power
452 W
452 W
Hot roof
70 °C
88.3% of rated power
433 W
433 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
490 Wp
490 Wp
Same
Module efficiency
24.50 %
24.00 %
+0.50 pp for AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
Power density
245.2 Wp/m²
240.1 Wp/m²
+5.2 Wp/m² for AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
Open-circuit voltage
41.00 V
41.02 V
Effectively the same
Voltage at max power
34.40 V
34.04 V
Effectively the same
Short-circuit current
14.94 A
15.10 A
Effectively the same
Current at max power
14.25 A
14.40 A
Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
1800x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 1800x1134x30 mm
Module area
1.998 m²
2.041 m²
0.043 m² apart
Weight
21.0 kg
24.8 kg
-3.8 kg for AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
Weight per kWp
42.9 kg/kWp
50.6 kg/kWp
-7.8 kg/kWp for AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
15 yrs
30 yrs
+15 yrs for ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.35 %/yr
0.45 %/yr
-0.10 %/yr for AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw
Technology
Cell technology
Back Contact
Back Contact
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
108
108
Same
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#74
vs
#303
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw leads by 229 places
Power density
#74
vs
#313
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw leads by 239 places
Heat behaviour
#511
vs
#511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#250
vs
#4,047
AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw leads by 3,797 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,408
vs
#2,176
ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE leads by 2,232 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A495-MCE54Mw
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A485-MCE54Mw
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A480-MCE54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A475-MCE54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw vs AIKO AIKO-A470-MCE54Mw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Heckert Solar
Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE vs Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP
The same specification on paper
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw or Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE?
According to our database: AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw has higher module efficiency (24.50% vs 24.00%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw and Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE?
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw has a module efficiency of 24.50%, while Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE is 24.00%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw use vs Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE?
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw uses Back Contact cells; Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE 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-A490-MCE54Mw and Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE?
AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw has a 30 years power warranty; Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE 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-A490-MCE54Mw and Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE bifacial panels?
Heckert Solar ZEUS 3.0+ 108 490WP PERFORMANCE is bifacial (captures light from both faces); AIKO AIKO-A490-MCE54Mw is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.
Shop prices: See 180 AIKO offers · See 16 Heckert 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.
