Skip to main content
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs 3SHBGH-C#-640 7 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640

GL Solar
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W
590 Wp 22.80 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
GL Solar
3SHBGH-C#-640
640 Wp 22.60 % HJT Bifacial
The verdict

3SHBGH-C#-640 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is rated power: 50 W more power. 7 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 12 differences
How alike are they
7 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

12 of 19 parameters
Parameter HY-NT10/72GDF-590W 3SHBGH-C#-640 Difference
Rated power 590 Wp 640 Wp 50 W more power
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.260 %/°C 0.030 %/°C better in heat
Weight 32.1 kg 36.0 kg 3.9 kg lighter
Open-circuit voltage 52.20 V 45.70 V 6.50 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.13 A 17.56 A 3.43 A apart
Module area 2.583 m² 2.830 m² 0.247 m² apart
Cell technology TOPCon HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Module efficiency 22.80 % 22.60 % 0.20 pp more efficient
Voltage at max power 44.15 V 38.91 V 5.24 V apart
Current at max power 13.37 A 16.46 A 3.09 A apart
Cell count 144 120 24 cells apart
Dimensions 2278x1134x30 mm 2172x1303x35 mm 2278x1134x30 mm vs 2172x1303x35 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
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W
19,796 kWh
3SHBGH-C#-640
21,243 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,447 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario HY-NT10/72GDF-590W 3SHBGH-C#-640
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 590 W 640 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 564 W 615 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 539 W 590 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 513 W 565 W
03

Full specification

Parameter HY-NT10/72GDF-590W 3SHBGH-C#-640 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 590 Wp 640 Wp +50 W for 3SHBGH-C#-640
Module efficiency 22.80 % 22.60 % +0.20 pp for HY-NT10/72GDF-590W
Power density 228.4 Wp/m² 226.1 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 52.20 V 45.70 V 6.50 V apart
Voltage at max power 44.15 V 38.91 V 5.24 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.13 A 17.56 A 3.43 A apart
Current at max power 13.37 A 16.46 A 3.09 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.260 %/°C +0.030 %/°C for 3SHBGH-C#-640
Mechanical
Dimensions 2278x1134x30 mm 2172x1303x35 mm 2278x1134x30 mm vs 2172x1303x35 mm
Module area 2.583 m² 2.830 m² 0.247 m² apart
Weight 32.1 kg 36.0 kg -3.9 kg for HY-NT10/72GDF-590W
Weight per kWp 54.4 kg/kWp 56.2 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 HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 144 120 24 cells apart
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#2,714 vs #3,658
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W leads by 944 places
Power density
#2,598 vs #3,681
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W leads by 1,083 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165 vs #511
3SHBGH-C#-640 leads by 1,654 places
Weight
#8,715 vs #10,518
HY-NT10/72GDF-590W leads by 1,803 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#3,167 vs #1,906
3SHBGH-C#-640 leads by 1,261 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-610W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-605W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-600W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W vs GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-595W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 vs GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-635
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
GL Solar
GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 vs GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-630
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W or GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640?
According to our database: GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590 W has higher module efficiency (22.80% vs 22.60%); GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.260%/°C vs -0.290%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W and GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640?
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590 W has a module efficiency of 22.80%, while GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 is 22.60%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W use vs GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640?
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590 W uses TOPCon cells; GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 uses HJT. 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 GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W and GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640?
GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590 W has a 30 years power warranty; GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 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 GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590W and GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 bifacial panels?
Both GL Solar HY-NT10/72GDF-590 W and GL Solar 3SHBGH-C#-640 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 2 GL 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.