Skip to main content
DH132NC-715 vs DH96NE.A-455 7 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455

DAS Solar
DAS-DH132NC-715
715 Wp 23.00 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455
DAS Solar
DAS-DH96NE.A-455
455 Wp 22.80 % TOPCon
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

11 differences, and they point both ways

The largest is rated power: 260 W more power. 7 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 11 differences
How alike are they
7 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

11 of 18 parameters
Parameter DH132NC-715 DH96NE.A-455 Difference
Rated power 715 Wp 455 Wp 260 W more power
Weight 38.3 kg 21.6 kg 16.7 kg lighter
Weight per kWp 53.6 kg/kWp 47.5 kg/kWp 6.1 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage 49.08 V 35.50 V 13.58 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 16.16 A 2.31 A apart
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Module efficiency 23.00 % 22.80 % 0.20 pp more efficient
Voltage at max power 40.98 V 30.22 V 10.76 V apart
Current at max power 17.45 A 15.06 A 2.39 A apart
Bifacial Yes No Yes vs No
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 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 (-0.280 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
DH132NC-715
23,990 kWh
DH96NE.A-455
15,266 kWh
Lifetime gap
8,724 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH132NC-715 DH96NE.A-455
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 715 W 455 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.8% of rated power 685 W 436 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.6% of rated power 655 W 417 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.4% of rated power 625 W 398 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH132NC-715 DH96NE.A-455 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 715 Wp 455 Wp +260 W for DH132NC-715
Module efficiency 23.00 % 22.80 % +0.20 pp for DH132NC-715
Power density 230.2 Wp/m² 227.7 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 49.08 V 35.50 V 13.58 V apart
Voltage at max power 40.98 V 30.22 V 10.76 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 16.16 A 2.31 A apart
Current at max power 17.45 A 15.06 A 2.39 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.280 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Weight 38.3 kg 21.6 kg -16.7 kg for DH96NE.A-455
Weight per kWp 53.6 kg/kWp 47.5 kg/kWp -6.1 kg/kWp for DH96NE.A-455
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 No Yes vs No
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#1,919 vs #2,714
DH132NC-715 leads by 795 places
Power density
#2,018 vs #2,888
DH132NC-715 leads by 870 places
Heat behaviour
#1,309 vs #1,309
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#7,566 vs #1,700
DH96NE.A-455 leads by 5,866 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#450 vs #7,786
DH132NC-715 leads by 7,336 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-DH96NE.A-455?
According to our database: DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 has higher module efficiency (23.00% vs 22.80%). 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-DH96NE.A-455?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 has a module efficiency of 23.00%, while DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455 is 22.80%. 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-DH96NE.A-455?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 uses TOPCon cells; DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455 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-DH96NE.A-455?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 has a 30 years power warranty; DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455 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-DH96NE.A-455 bifacial panels?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715 is bifacial (captures light from both faces); DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455 is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

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.