Skip to main content
DH156NA-635W vs DH132NC-710 8 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710

DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W
DAS Solar
DAS-DH156NA-635W
635 Wp 22.70 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
DAS Solar
DAS-DH132NC-710
710 Wp 22.90 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

DH132NC-710 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is rated power: 75 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 DH156NA-635W DH132NC-710 Difference
Rated power 635 Wp 710 Wp 75 W more power
Weight 34.3 kg 38.3 kg 4.0 kg lighter
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.280 %/°C 0.020 %/°C better in heat
Open-circuit voltage 56.01 V 48.92 V 7.09 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.42 A 18.42 A 4.00 A apart
Module area 2.795 m² 3.106 m² 0.311 m² apart
Module efficiency 22.70 % 22.90 % 0.20 pp more efficient
Voltage at max power 46.42 V 40.81 V 5.61 V apart
Current at max power 13.68 A 17.40 A 3.72 A apart
Dimensions 2465x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 2465x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 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
DH156NA-635W
21,306 kWh
DH132NC-710
23,822 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,516 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH156NA-635W DH132NC-710
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 635 W 710 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 606 W 680 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 578 W 650 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 549 W 621 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH156NA-635W DH132NC-710 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 635 Wp 710 Wp +75 W for DH132NC-710
Module efficiency 22.70 % 22.90 % +0.20 pp for DH132NC-710
Power density 227.2 Wp/m² 228.6 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 56.01 V 48.92 V 7.09 V apart
Voltage at max power 46.42 V 40.81 V 5.61 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.42 A 18.42 A 4.00 A apart
Current at max power 13.68 A 17.40 A 3.72 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.280 %/°C +0.020 %/°C for DH132NC-710
Mechanical
Dimensions 2465x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 2465x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area 2.795 m² 3.106 m² 0.311 m² apart
Weight 34.3 kg 38.3 kg -4.0 kg for DH156NA-635W
Weight per kWp 54.0 kg/kWp 53.9 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
#3,307 vs #2,359
DH132NC-710 leads by 948 places
Power density
#3,252 vs #2,474
DH132NC-710 leads by 778 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093 vs #1,309
DH132NC-710 leads by 4,784 places
Weight
#8,218 vs #8,122
DH132NC-710 leads by 96 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#1,931 vs #576
DH132NC-710 leads by 1,355 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-640W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-630W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-625W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715
The same specification on paper
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W or DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
According to our database: DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 has higher module efficiency (22.90% vs 22.70%); DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 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-DH156NA-635W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635 W has a module efficiency of 22.70%, while DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 is 22.90%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W use vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635 W uses TOPCon cells; DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 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-DH156NA-635W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635 W has a 30 years power warranty; DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 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-DH156NA-635W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 bifacial panels?
Both DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635 W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 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.