Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605
VS
The verdict
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads on the differences that matter
The largest is temperature coefficient: 0.040 %/°C better in heat. 11 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 8 differencesHow alike are they
11
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
8 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605
Difference
Temperature coefficient
-0.300 %/°C
-0.340 %/°C
0.040 %/°C better in heat
Module efficiency
22.40 %
21.70 %
0.70 pp more efficient
Annual degradation
0.33 %/yr
0.45 %/yr
0.12 %/yr slower
Power density
223.9 Wp/m²
216.7 Wp/m²
7.2 Wp/m² higher
Rated power
625 Wp
605 Wp
20 W more power
Open-circuit voltage
56.95 V
53.69 V
3.26 V apart
Cell technology
N-type
PERC
N-type vs PERC
Voltage at max power
47.70 V
45.40 V
2.30 V apart
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
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
21,086 kWh
PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605
19,923 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,163 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
625 W
605 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
94.9% of rated power
597 W
574 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
89.8% of rated power
569 W
543 W
Hot roof
70 °C
84.7% of rated power
541 W
512 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
625 Wp
605 Wp
+20 W for TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
Module efficiency
22.40 %
21.70 %
+0.70 pp for TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
Power density
223.9 Wp/m²
216.7 Wp/m²
+7.2 Wp/m² for TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
Open-circuit voltage
56.95 V
53.69 V
3.26 V apart
Voltage at max power
47.70 V
45.40 V
2.30 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.82 A
13.90 A
Effectively the same
Current at max power
13.10 A
13.33 A
Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.300 %/°C
-0.340 %/°C
+0.040 %/°C for TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
Mechanical
Dimensions
2462x1134x35 mm
2462x1134x35 mm
Same
Module area
2.792 m²
2.792 m²
Same
Weight
35.4 kg
34.9 kg
Effectively the same
Weight per kWp
56.6 kg/kWp
57.7 kg/kWp
Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
12 yrs
12 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.33 %/yr
0.45 %/yr
-0.12 %/yr for TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625
Technology
Cell technology
N-type
PERC
N-type vs PERC
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
156
156
Same
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#4,774
vs
#7,421
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads by 2,647 places
Power density
#4,872
vs
#7,537
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads by 2,665 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093
vs
#8,778
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads by 2,685 places
Weight
#10,791
vs
#11,362
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads by 571 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#3,038
vs
#4,578
TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 leads by 1,540 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 645
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 640
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 635
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 630
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 620
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 vs Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 615
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 or Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605?
According to our database: Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 has higher module efficiency (22.40% vs 21.70%); Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.300%/°C vs -0.340%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 and Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605?
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 has a module efficiency of 22.40%, while Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605 is 21.70%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 use vs Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605?
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 uses N-type cells; Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605 uses PERC. 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 Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 and Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605?
Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 has a 30 years power warranty; Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605 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 Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 and Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605 bifacial panels?
Both Q-Cells Q.TRON XL-G2.3 / BFG 625 and Q-Cells Q.PEAK DUO XL-G11S.3 / BFG 605 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 25 Q-Cells 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.

