Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
VS
The verdict
9 differences, and they point both ways
The largest is rated power: 45 W more power. 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
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
Difference
Rated power
465 Wp
510 Wp
45 W more power
Module efficiency
23.30 %
22.90 %
0.40 pp more efficient
Open-circuit voltage
36.93 V
41.21 V
4.28 V apart
Module area
1.998 m²
2.224 m²
0.226 m² apart
Weight
24.5 kg
26.9 kg
2.4 kg lighter
Power density
232.7 Wp/m²
229.3 Wp/m²
3.4 Wp/m² higher
Cell count
96
108
12 cells apart
Voltage at max power
30.80 V
34.29 V
3.49 V apart
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 1961x1134x30 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 (-0.290 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
15,602 kWh
CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
17,112 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,510 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
465 W
510 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
445 W
488 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
425 W
466 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
404 W
443 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
465 Wp
510 Wp
+45 W for CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510
Module efficiency
23.30 %
22.90 %
+0.40 pp for CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
Power density
232.7 Wp/m²
229.3 Wp/m²
+3.4 Wp/m² for CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
Open-circuit voltage
36.93 V
41.21 V
4.28 V apart
Voltage at max power
30.80 V
34.29 V
3.49 V apart
Short-circuit current
15.84 A
15.70 A
Effectively the same
Current at max power
15.10 A
14.87 A
Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 1961x1134x30 mm
Module area
1.998 m²
2.224 m²
0.226 m² apart
Weight
24.5 kg
26.9 kg
-2.4 kg for CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465
Weight per kWp
52.7 kg/kWp
52.7 kg/kWp
Same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
25 yrs
25 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
Same
Technology
Cell technology
TOPCon
TOPCon
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
96
108
12 cells apart
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#1,017
vs
#2,359
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 leads by 1,342 places
Power density
#1,115
vs
#2,343
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 leads by 1,228 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165
vs
#2,165
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#6,318
vs
#6,400
CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 leads by 82 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,775
vs
#3,700
CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 leads by 1,075 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-530
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-525
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-520
7 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-515
7 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-470
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 vs Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-460
One difference: module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 or Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510?
According to our database: Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 has higher module efficiency (23.30% vs 22.90%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 and Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510?
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 has a module efficiency of 23.30%, while Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 is 22.90%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 use vs Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510?
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 uses TOPCon cells; Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 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 Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 and Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510?
Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 has a 30 years power warranty; Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 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 Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 and Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 bifacial panels?
Both Astronergy CHSM48RN(DG)(BLH)/F-BH-465 and Astronergy CHSM54RN(DG)/F-BH-510 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 41 Astronergy 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.

