Skip to main content
DH156NA-645W vs DH132NC-705 7 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705

DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W
DAS Solar
DAS-DH156NA-645W
645 Wp 23.10 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
DAS Solar
DAS-DH132NC-705
705 Wp 22.70 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

11 differences, and they point both ways

The largest is rated power: 60 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 DH156NA-645W DH132NC-705 Difference
Rated power 645 Wp 705 Wp 60 W more power
Weight 34.3 kg 38.3 kg 4.0 kg lighter
Module efficiency 23.10 % 22.70 % 0.40 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.280 %/°C 0.020 %/°C better in heat
Open-circuit voltage 56.36 V 48.72 V 7.64 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.53 A 18.38 A 3.85 A apart
Module area 2.795 m² 3.106 m² 0.311 m² apart
Power density 230.7 Wp/m² 227.0 Wp/m² 3.8 Wp/m² higher
Voltage at max power 46.78 V 40.62 V 6.16 V apart
Current at max power 13.79 A 17.36 A 3.57 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-645W
21,641 kWh
DH132NC-705
23,654 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,013 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH156NA-645W DH132NC-705
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 645 W 705 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 616 W 675 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 587 W 646 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 558 W 616 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH156NA-645W DH132NC-705 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 645 Wp 705 Wp +60 W for DH132NC-705
Module efficiency 23.10 % 22.70 % +0.40 pp for DH156NA-645W
Power density 230.7 Wp/m² 227.0 Wp/m² +3.8 Wp/m² for DH156NA-645W
Open-circuit voltage 56.36 V 48.72 V 7.64 V apart
Voltage at max power 46.78 V 40.62 V 6.16 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.53 A 18.38 A 3.85 A apart
Current at max power 13.79 A 17.36 A 3.57 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.280 %/°C +0.020 %/°C for DH132NC-705
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-645W
Weight per kWp 53.2 kg/kWp 54.3 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
#1,570 vs #3,307
DH156NA-645W leads by 1,737 places
Power density
#1,654 vs #3,361
DH156NA-645W leads by 1,707 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093 vs #1,309
DH132NC-705 leads by 4,784 places
Weight
#7,008 vs #8,604
DH156NA-645W leads by 1,596 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#1,496 vs #747
DH132NC-705 leads by 749 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-650W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-640W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-635W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-630W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W vs DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-625W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-715
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W or DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705?
According to our database: DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645 W has higher module efficiency (23.10% vs 22.70%); DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 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-645W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645 W has a module efficiency of 23.10%, while DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 is 22.70%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645W use vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645 W uses TOPCon cells; DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 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-645W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705?
DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645 W has a 30 years power warranty; DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 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-645W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 bifacial panels?
Both DAS Solar DAS-DH156NA-645 W and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-705 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.