Skip to main content
DH96NE.A-450 vs DH132NC-710 6 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710

DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450
DAS Solar
DAS-DH96NE.A-450
450 Wp 22.50 % TOPCon
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
DAS Solar
DAS-DH132NC-710
710 Wp 22.90 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

12 differences, and they point both ways

The largest is rated power: 260 W more power. 6 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 12 differences
How alike are they
6 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

12 of 18 parameters
Parameter DH96NE.A-450 DH132NC-710 Difference
Rated power 450 Wp 710 Wp 260 W more power
Weight 21.6 kg 38.3 kg 16.7 kg lighter
Module efficiency 22.50 % 22.90 % 0.40 pp more efficient
Weight per kWp 48.0 kg/kWp 53.9 kg/kWp 5.9 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage 35.30 V 48.92 V 13.62 V apart
Short-circuit current 16.08 A 18.42 A 2.34 A apart
Module area 1.998 m² 3.106 m² 1.108 m² apart
Power density 225.2 Wp/m² 228.6 Wp/m² 3.4 Wp/m² higher
Voltage at max power 30.02 V 40.81 V 10.79 V apart
Current at max power 14.99 A 17.40 A 2.41 A apart
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
Dimensions 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 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
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.
DH96NE.A-450
15,098 kWh
DH132NC-710
23,822 kWh
Lifetime gap
8,724 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH96NE.A-450 DH132NC-710
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 450 W 710 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.8% of rated power 431 W 680 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.6% of rated power 412 W 650 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.4% of rated power 393 W 621 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH96NE.A-450 DH132NC-710 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 450 Wp 710 Wp +260 W for DH132NC-710
Module efficiency 22.50 % 22.90 % +0.40 pp for DH132NC-710
Power density 225.2 Wp/m² 228.6 Wp/m² +3.4 Wp/m² for DH132NC-710
Open-circuit voltage 35.30 V 48.92 V 13.62 V apart
Voltage at max power 30.02 V 40.81 V 10.79 V apart
Short-circuit current 16.08 A 18.42 A 2.34 A apart
Current at max power 14.99 A 17.40 A 2.41 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.280 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area 1.998 m² 3.106 m² 1.108 m² apart
Weight 21.6 kg 38.3 kg -16.7 kg for DH96NE.A-450
Weight per kWp 48.0 kg/kWp 53.9 kg/kWp -5.9 kg/kWp for DH96NE.A-450
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 No Yes No vs Yes
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#4,222 vs #2,359
DH132NC-710 leads by 1,863 places
Power density
#4,225 vs #2,474
DH132NC-710 leads by 1,751 places
Heat behaviour
#1,309 vs #1,309
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#2,004 vs #8,122
DH96NE.A-450 leads by 6,118 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#8,386 vs #576
DH132NC-710 leads by 7,810 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-470
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-465
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-460
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-455
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
DAS Solar
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 vs DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-445
One difference: 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-DH96NE.A-450 or DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
According to our database: DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 has higher module efficiency (22.90% vs 22.50%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 has a module efficiency of 22.50%, 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-DH96NE.A-450 use vs DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 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-DH96NE.A-450 and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710?
DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 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-DH96NE.A-450 and DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 bifacial panels?
DAS Solar DAS-DH132NC-710 is bifacial (captures light from both faces); DAS Solar DAS-DH96NE.A-450 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.