Skip to main content
JAM66D46-710/LB vs JAM54D40-460/LR 6 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR

JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB
JAM66D46-710/LB
710 Wp 22.90 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR
JAM54D40-460/LR
460 Wp 23.00 % N-type
The verdict

JAM54D40-460/LR leads on the differences that matter

The largest is rated power: 250 W more power. 6 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 13 differences
How alike are they
6 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

13 of 19 parameters
Parameter JAM66D46-710/LB JAM54D40-460/LR Difference
Rated power 710 Wp 460 Wp 250 W more power
Weight 38.2 kg 22.0 kg 16.2 kg lighter
Product warranty 12 yrs 15 yrs 3 yrs longer
Weight per kWp 53.8 kg/kWp 47.8 kg/kWp 6.0 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage 48.16 V 39.70 V 8.46 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 14.64 A 3.83 A apart
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Cell technology TOPCon N-type TOPCon vs N-type
Voltage at max power 40.40 V 33.17 V 7.23 V apart
Current at max power 17.32 A 13.87 A 3.45 A apart
Cell count 132 108 24 cells apart
Bifacial Yes No Yes vs No
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 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 (-0.290 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
JAM66D46-710/LB
23,822 kWh
JAM54D40-460/LR
15,434 kWh
Lifetime gap
8,388 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario JAM66D46-710/LB JAM54D40-460/LR
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 710 W 460 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 679 W 440 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 648 W 420 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 617 W 400 W
03

Full specification

Parameter JAM66D46-710/LB JAM54D40-460/LR Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 710 Wp 460 Wp +250 W for JAM66D46-710/LB
Module efficiency 22.90 % 23.00 % Effectively the same
Power density 228.6 Wp/m² 230.2 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 48.16 V 39.70 V 8.46 V apart
Voltage at max power 40.40 V 33.17 V 7.23 V apart
Short-circuit current 18.47 A 14.64 A 3.83 A apart
Current at max power 17.32 A 13.87 A 3.45 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.290 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Weight 38.2 kg 22.0 kg -16.2 kg for JAM54D40-460/LR
Weight per kWp 53.8 kg/kWp 47.8 kg/kWp -6.0 kg/kWp for JAM54D40-460/LR
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 12 yrs 15 yrs +3 yrs for JAM54D40-460/LR
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.40 %/yr 0.40 %/yr Same
Technology
Cell technology TOPCon N-type TOPCon vs N-type
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 108 24 cells apart
Bifacial Yes No Yes vs No
04

Against the whole database

14,129 panels
Efficiency
#2,412 vs #1,970
JAM54D40-460/LR leads by 442 places
Power density
#2,529 vs #1,927
JAM54D40-460/LR leads by 602 places
Heat behaviour
#2,220 vs #2,220
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#7,959 vs #1,925
JAM54D40-460/LR leads by 6,034 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#830 vs #7,408
JAM66D46-710/LB leads by 6,578 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-740/LB
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-735/LB
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-730/LB
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-725/LB
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-720/LB
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D46-715/LB
The same specification on paper
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB or JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR?
According to our database: JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR has higher module efficiency (23.00% vs 22.90%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB and JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR?
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB has a module efficiency of 22.90%, while JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR is 23.00%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB use vs JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR?
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB uses TOPCon cells; JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR uses N-type. 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 JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB and JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR?
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB has a 30 years power warranty; JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR 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 JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB and JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR bifacial panels?
JA Solar JAM66D46-710/LB is bifacial (captures light from both faces); JA Solar JAM54D40-460/LR is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

Shop prices: See 321 JA 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.