JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB
VS
The verdict
JAM66D45-610/LB leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 0.90 pp more efficient. 5 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 14 differencesHow alike are they
5
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
14 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V
JAM66D45-610/LB
Difference
Module efficiency
21.70 %
22.60 %
0.90 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient
-0.350 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
0.060 %/°C better in heat
Rated power
575 Wp
610 Wp
35 W more power
Power density
217.3 Wp/m²
225.8 Wp/m²
8.5 Wp/m² higher
Short-circuit current
14.44 A
16.05 A
1.61 A apart
Module area
2.646 m²
2.701 m²
0.056 m² apart
Open-circuit voltage
50.86 V
48.10 V
2.76 V apart
Cell technology
PERC
TOPCon
PERC vs TOPCon
Cell count
144
132
12 cells apart
Annual degradation
0.45 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
0.05 %/yr slower
Weight per kWp
56.5 kg/kWp
54.3 kg/kWp
2.3 kg/kWp lighter
Current at max power
13.67 A
15.34 A
1.67 A apart
Voltage at max power
42.05 V
39.77 V
2.28 V apart
Dimensions
2333x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm
2333x1134x30 mm vs 2382x1134x30 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
JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V
18,935 kWh
JAM66D45-610/LB
20,467 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,532 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V
JAM66D45-610/LB
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
575 W
610 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
94.8% of rated power
545 W
583 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
89.5% of rated power
515 W
557 W
Hot roof
70 °C
84.2% of rated power
484 W
530 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V
JAM66D45-610/LB
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
575 Wp
610 Wp
+35 W for JAM66D45-610/LB
Module efficiency
21.70 %
22.60 %
+0.90 pp for JAM66D45-610/LB
Power density
217.3 Wp/m²
225.8 Wp/m²
+8.5 Wp/m² for JAM66D45-610/LB
Open-circuit voltage
50.86 V
48.10 V
2.76 V apart
Voltage at max power
42.05 V
39.77 V
2.28 V apart
Short-circuit current
14.44 A
16.05 A
1.61 A apart
Current at max power
13.67 A
15.34 A
1.67 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.350 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
+0.060 %/°C for JAM66D45-610/LB
Mechanical
Dimensions
2333x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm
2333x1134x30 mm vs 2382x1134x30 mm
Module area
2.646 m²
2.701 m²
0.056 m² apart
Weight
32.5 kg
33.1 kg
Effectively the same
Weight per kWp
56.5 kg/kWp
54.3 kg/kWp
-2.3 kg/kWp for JAM66D45-610/LB
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
12 yrs
12 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.45 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
-0.05 %/yr for JAM66D45-610/LB
Technology
Cell technology
PERC
TOPCon
PERC vs TOPCon
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
144
132
12 cells apart
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#7,421
vs
#3,658
JAM66D45-610/LB leads by 3,763 places
Power density
#7,324
vs
#3,729
JAM66D45-610/LB leads by 3,595 places
Heat behaviour
#10,419
vs
#2,165
JAM66D45-610/LB leads by 8,254 places
Weight
#10,695
vs
#8,515
JAM66D45-610/LB leads by 2,180 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#5,574
vs
#3,289
JAM66D45-610/LB leads by 2,285 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM72D30-580/LB/1500V
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM72D30-570/LB/1500V
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM72D30-565/LB/1500V
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM72D30-560/LB/1500V
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V vs JA Solar JAM72D30-555/LB/1500V
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB vs JA Solar JAM66D45-630/LB
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V or JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB?
According to our database: JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB has higher module efficiency (22.60% vs 21.70%); JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.290%/°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 JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V and JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB?
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V has a module efficiency of 21.70%, while JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB is 22.60%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V use vs JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB?
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V uses PERC cells; JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB 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 JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V and JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB?
JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V has a 30 years power warranty; JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB 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 JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V and JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB bifacial panels?
Both JA Solar JAM72D30-575/LB/1500V and JA Solar JAM66D45-610/LB 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 341 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.
