AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs Canadian Solar CS6W-585T
VS
The verdict
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 1.50 pp more efficient. 2 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 17 differencesHow alike are they
2
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
17 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
CS6W-585T
Difference
Module efficiency
24.10 %
22.60 %
1.50 pp more efficient
Rated power
650 Wp
585 Wp
65 W more power
Power density
240.6 Wp/m²
226.5 Wp/m²
14.2 Wp/m² higher
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
0.030 %/°C better in heat
Weight
32.5 kg
27.6 kg
4.9 kg lighter
Product warranty
15 yrs
12 yrs
3 yrs longer
Short-circuit current
16.62 A
14.00 A
2.62 A apart
Module area
2.701 m²
2.583 m²
0.118 m² apart
Open-circuit voltage
49.30 V
52.40 V
3.10 V apart
Cell technology
Back Contact
TOPCon
Back Contact vs TOPCon
Weight per kWp
50.0 kg/kWp
47.2 kg/kWp
2.8 kg/kWp lighter
Annual degradation
0.35 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
0.05 %/yr slower
Cell count
132
144
12 cells apart
Current at max power
15.48 A
13.52 A
1.96 A apart
Bifacial
Yes
No
Yes vs No
Dimensions
2382x1134x30 mm
2278x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm vs 2278x1134x30 mm
Voltage at max power
42.00 V
43.30 V
1.30 V 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
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
21,978 kWh
CS6W-585T
19,628 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,350 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
CS6W-585T
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
650 W
585 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
625 W
560 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
599 W
534 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
574 W
509 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
CS6W-585T
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
650 Wp
585 Wp
+65 W for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Module efficiency
24.10 %
22.60 %
+1.50 pp for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Power density
240.6 Wp/m²
226.5 Wp/m²
+14.2 Wp/m² for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Open-circuit voltage
49.30 V
52.40 V
3.10 V apart
Voltage at max power
42.00 V
43.30 V
1.30 V apart
Short-circuit current
16.62 A
14.00 A
2.62 A apart
Current at max power
15.48 A
13.52 A
1.96 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
+0.030 %/°C for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Mechanical
Dimensions
2382x1134x30 mm
2278x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm vs 2278x1134x30 mm
Module area
2.701 m²
2.583 m²
0.118 m² apart
Weight
32.5 kg
27.6 kg
-4.9 kg for CS6W-585T
Weight per kWp
50.0 kg/kWp
47.2 kg/kWp
-2.8 kg/kWp for CS6W-585T
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
15 yrs
12 yrs
+3 yrs for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.35 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
-0.05 %/yr for AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw
Technology
Cell technology
Back Contact
TOPCon
Back Contact vs TOPCon
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
132
144
12 cells apart
Bifacial
Yes
No
Yes vs No
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#219
vs
#3,658
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw leads by 3,439 places
Power density
#233
vs
#3,500
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw leads by 3,267 places
Heat behaviour
#511
vs
#2,165
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw leads by 1,654 places
Weight
#3,317
vs
#1,536
CS6W-585T leads by 1,781 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#884
vs
#4,059
AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw leads by 3,175 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs AIKO AIKO-G660-MCH72Dw
9 differences, the largest is open-circuit voltage
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs AIKO AIKO-A660-GRH66Dw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs AIKO AIKO-A655-GRH66Dw
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs AIKO AIKO-A645-GRH66Dw
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw vs AIKO AIKO-A640-GRH66Dw
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Canadian Solar CS6W-585T vs Canadian Solar CS6.2-66TM-635
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw or Canadian Solar CS6W-585T?
According to our database: AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw has higher module efficiency (24.10% vs 22.60%); AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw 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 AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw and Canadian Solar CS6W-585T?
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw has a module efficiency of 24.10%, while Canadian Solar CS6W-585T is 22.60%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw use vs Canadian Solar CS6W-585T?
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw uses Back Contact cells; Canadian Solar CS6W-585T uses TOPCon. 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-A650-GRH66Dw and Canadian Solar CS6W-585T?
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw has a 30 years power warranty; Canadian Solar CS6W-585T 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-A650-GRH66Dw and Canadian Solar CS6W-585T bifacial panels?
AIKO AIKO-A650-GRH66Dw is bifacial (captures light from both faces); Canadian Solar CS6W-585T is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.
Shop prices: See 174 AIKO offers · See 40 Canadian 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.

