Skip to main content
EX560MB(144)182 vs EX585TC-144HC182BF 8 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

Exiom EX560MB(144)182 vs Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF

Exiom EX560MB(144)182
Exiom
EX560MB(144)182
560 Wp 21.70 % PERC Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF
Exiom
EX585TC-144HC182BF
585 Wp 22.60 % TOPCon Bifacial Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

EX585TC-144HC182BF leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 0.90 pp more efficient. 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 EX560MB(144)182 EX585TC-144HC182BF Difference
Module efficiency 21.70 % 22.60 % 0.90 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient -0.350 %/°C -0.280 %/°C 0.070 %/°C better in heat
Power density 216.7 Wp/m² 226.4 Wp/m² 9.7 Wp/m² higher
Weight 27.3 kg 31.5 kg 4.2 kg lighter
Rated power 560 Wp 585 Wp 25 W more power
Weight per kWp 48.8 kg/kWp 53.8 kg/kWp 5.1 kg/kWp lighter
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
Open-circuit voltage 50.15 V 51.52 V 1.37 V apart
Voltage at max power 42.27 V 43.33 V 1.06 V apart
02

What it means on a roof

Thirty years of production
A 1.0% first-year loss then 0.40% a year, assumed for both panels, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year
EX560MB(144)182
18,789 kWh
EX585TC-144HC182BF
19,628 kWh
Lifetime gap
839 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario EX560MB(144)182 EX585TC-144HC182BF
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 560 W 585 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 94.8% of rated power 531 W 560 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 89.5% of rated power 501 W 536 W
Hot roof 70 °C 84.2% of rated power 472 W 511 W
03

Full specification

Parameter EX560MB(144)182 EX585TC-144HC182BF Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 560 Wp 585 Wp +25 W for EX585TC-144HC182BF
Module efficiency 21.70 % 22.60 % +0.90 pp for EX585TC-144HC182BF
Power density 216.7 Wp/m² 226.4 Wp/m² +9.7 Wp/m² for EX585TC-144HC182BF
Open-circuit voltage 50.15 V 51.52 V 1.37 V apart
Voltage at max power 42.27 V 43.33 V 1.06 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.14 A 14.30 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 13.25 A 13.51 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.350 %/°C -0.280 %/°C +0.070 %/°C for EX585TC-144HC182BF
Mechanical
Dimensions 2279x1134 mm 2279x1134 mm Same
Module area 2.584 m² 2.584 m² Same
Weight 27.3 kg 31.5 kg -4.2 kg for EX560MB(144)182
Weight per kWp 48.8 kg/kWp 53.8 kg/kWp -5.1 kg/kWp for EX560MB(144)182
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 25 yrs 25 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation - - Neither datasheet publishes this
Technology
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 144 144 Same
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#7,421 vs #3,658
EX585TC-144HC182BF leads by 3,763 places
Power density
#7,538 vs #3,631
EX585TC-144HC182BF leads by 3,907 places
Heat behaviour
#10,419 vs #1,309
EX585TC-144HC182BF leads by 9,110 places
Weight
#2,441 vs #7,897
EX560MB(144)182 leads by 5,456 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#3,301 vs #1,806
EX585TC-144HC182BF leads by 1,495 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 vs Exiom EX555MB(144)182
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 vs Exiom EX550MB(144)182
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 vs Exiom EX545MB(144)182
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 vs Exiom EX540MB(144)182
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF vs Exiom EX605TC-144HC182BF
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Exiom
Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF vs Exiom EX600TC-144HC182BF
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Exiom EX560MB(144)182 or Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF?
According to our database: Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF has higher module efficiency (22.60% vs 21.70%); Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.280%/°C vs -0.350%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Exiom EX560MB(144)182 and Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF?
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 has a module efficiency of 21.70%, while Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF is 22.60%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Exiom EX560MB(144)182 use vs Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF?
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 uses PERC cells; Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF 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 Exiom EX560MB(144)182 and Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF?
Exiom EX560MB(144)182 has a 30 years power warranty; Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF 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 Exiom EX560MB(144)182 and Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF bifacial panels?
Exiom EX585TC-144HC182BF is bifacial (captures light from both faces); Exiom EX560MB(144)182 is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

Shop prices: See 1 Exiom offer

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.