Skip to main content
DH132NC-715 vs DH156NA-650W 8 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W

DAS Solar
DAS-DH132NC-715
715 Wp 23.00 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W
DAS Solar
DAS-DH156NA-650W
650 Wp 23.30 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

10 differences, and they point both ways

The largest is rated power: 65 W more power. 8 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 10 differences
How alike are they
8 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

10 of 18 parameters
Parameter DH132NC-715 DH156NA-650W Difference
Rated power 715 Wp 650 Wp 65 W more power
Weight 38.3 kg 34.3 kg 4.0 kg lighter
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.300 %/°C 0.020 %/°C better in heat
Open-circuit voltage 49.08 V 56.55 V 7.47 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 14.59 A 3.88 A apart
Module area 3.106 m² 2.795 m² 0.311 m² apart
Module efficiency 23.00 % 23.30 % 0.30 pp more efficient
Voltage at max power 40.98 V 46.97 V 5.99 V apart
Current at max power 17.45 A 13.84 A 3.61 A apart
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 2465x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 2465x1134x30 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
DH132NC-715
23,990 kWh
DH156NA-650W
21,809 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,181 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH132NC-715 DH156NA-650W
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 715 W 650 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 685 W 621 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 655 W 592 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 625 W 562 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH132NC-715 DH156NA-650W Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 715 Wp 650 Wp +65 W for DH132NC-715
Module efficiency 23.00 % 23.30 % +0.30 pp for DH156NA-650W
Power density 230.2 Wp/m² 232.5 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 49.08 V 56.55 V 7.47 V apart
Voltage at max power 40.98 V 46.97 V 5.99 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 14.59 A 3.88 A apart
Current at max power 17.45 A 13.84 A 3.61 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.300 %/°C +0.020 %/°C for DH132NC-715
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 2465x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 2465x1134x30 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 2.795 m² 0.311 m² apart
Weight 38.3 kg 34.3 kg -4.0 kg for DH156NA-650W
Weight per kWp 53.6 kg/kWp 52.8 kg/kWp Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 15 yrs 15 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 132 - Not published by DAS Solar
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#1,919 vs #1,017
DH156NA-650W leads by 902 places
Power density
#2,018 vs #1,222
DH156NA-650W leads by 796 places
Heat behaviour
#1,309 vs #6,093
DH132NC-715 leads by 4,784 places
Weight
#7,566 vs #6,449
DH156NA-650W leads by 1,117 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#450 vs #1,318
DH132NC-715 leads by 868 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-700
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-695
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NE-650W
9 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NE-645W
9 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 or DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W?
According to our database: DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650 W has higher module efficiency (23.30% vs 23.00%); DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.280%/°C vs -0.300%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 and DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 has a module efficiency of 23.00%, while DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650 W is 23.30%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 use vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 uses TOPCon cells; DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650 W 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 DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 and DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 has a 30 years power warranty; DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650 W 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 DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 and DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W bifacial panels?
Both DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 and DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650 W 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 4 DAS 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.