Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735
Gamko New Energy
GKA210N132-720W (series)
720 Wp
23.18 %
TOPCon
Bifacial
Incomplete
VS
The verdict
735 leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 0.48 pp more efficient. 14 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.
See all 4 differencesHow alike are they
14
of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
not published
01
4 of 18 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
720W (series)
735
Difference
Module efficiency
23.18 %
23.66 %
0.48 pp more efficient
Power density
231.8 Wp/m²
236.6 Wp/m²
4.8 Wp/m² higher
Rated power
720 Wp
735 Wp
15 W more power
Dimensions
2384x1303x30 mm
2384x1303x33 mm
2384x1303x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
02
What it means on a roof
Thirty years of production
Declared first-year losses, with 0.40% a year afterwards assumed for both panels, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year
Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.340 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
720W (series)
23,898 kWh
735
24,396 kWh
Lifetime gap
498 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
720W (series)
735
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
720 W
735 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
94.9% of rated power
683 W
698 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
89.8% of rated power
647 W
660 W
Hot roof
70 °C
84.7% of rated power
610 W
623 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
720W (series)
735
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
720 Wp
735 Wp
+15 W for 735
Module efficiency
23.18 %
23.66 %
+0.48 pp for 735
Power density
231.8 Wp/m²
236.6 Wp/m²
+4.8 Wp/m² for 735
Open-circuit voltage
47.11 V
47.72 V
Effectively the same
Voltage at max power
38.91 V
39.77 V
Effectively the same
Short-circuit current
19.43 A
19.40 A
Effectively the same
Current at max power
18.50 A
18.48 A
Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.340 %/°C
-0.340 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
2384x1303x30 mm
2384x1303x33 mm
2384x1303x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area
3.106 m²
3.106 m²
Same
Weight
32.0 kg
32.0 kg
Same
Weight per kWp
44.4 kg/kWp
43.5 kg/kWp
Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
12 yrs
12 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
-
0.45 %/yr
Not published by Gamko New Energy
Technology
Cell technology
TOPCon
TOPCon
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
132
132
Same
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,129 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#1,468
vs
#634
735 leads by 834 places
Power density
#1,390
vs
#614
735 leads by 776 places
Heat behaviour
#8,846
vs
#8,846
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#447
vs
#307
735 leads by 140 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#510
vs
#226
735 leads by 284 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-715W (series)
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-710W (series)
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-705W (series)
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-700W (series)
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Gamko New Energy
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-750
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) or Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735?
According to our database: Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 has higher module efficiency (23.66% vs 23.18%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) and Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735?
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720 W (series) has a module efficiency of 23.18%, while Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 is 23.66%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) use vs Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735?
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720 W (series) uses TOPCon cells; Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 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 Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) and Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735?
Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720 W (series) has a 30 years power warranty; Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 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 Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720W (series) and Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 bifacial panels?
Both Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-720 W (series) and Gamko New Energy GKA210N132-735 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.
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.