Skip to main content
(505W) vs (515W) 16 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)

Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W)
JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W)
505 Wp 23.36 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)
JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)
515 Wp 23.83 % TOPCon Bifacial
The verdict

(515W) leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 0.47 pp more efficient. 16 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 3 differences
How alike are they
16 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

3 of 19 parameters
Parameter (505W) (515W) Difference
Module efficiency 23.36 % 23.83 % 0.47 pp more efficient
Power density 233.6 Wp/m² 238.3 Wp/m² 4.6 Wp/m² higher
Rated power 505 Wp 515 Wp 10 W more power
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 (-0.260 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
(505W)
17,076 kWh
(515W)
17,414 kWh
Lifetime gap
338 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario (505W) (515W)
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 505 W 515 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 96.1% of rated power 485 W 495 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 92.2% of rated power 466 W 475 W
Hot roof 70 °C 88.3% of rated power 446 W 455 W
03

Full specification

Parameter (505W) (515W) Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 505 Wp 515 Wp +10 W for (515W)
Module efficiency 23.36 % 23.83 % +0.47 pp for (515W)
Power density 233.6 Wp/m² 238.3 Wp/m² +4.6 Wp/m² for (515W)
Open-circuit voltage 38.85 V 39.35 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 33.12 V 33.42 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 15.86 A 15.96 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 15.25 A 15.41 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.260 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 1906x1134x30 mm 1906x1134x30 mm Same
Module area 2.161 m² 2.161 m² Same
Weight 26.3 kg 26.3 kg Same
Weight per kWp 52.1 kg/kWp 51.1 kg/kWp Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 15 yrs 15 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.35 %/yr 0.35 %/yr Same
Technology
Cell technology TOPCon TOPCon Same
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 204 204 Same
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#937 vs #415
(515W) leads by 522 places
Power density
#926 vs #426
(515W) leads by 500 places
Heat behaviour
#511 vs #511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#5,512 vs #4,402
(515W) leads by 1,110 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#5,398 vs #4,495
(515W) leads by 903 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (520W)
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (510W)
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (500W)
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (495W)
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM710-735N-66HL5-BDV-Z3-EU (735W bin)
13 differences, the largest is rated power
Same manufacturer
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) vs Jinko Solar JKM735N-66HL5-BDV-Z3-EU
13 differences, the largest is rated power
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) or Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)?
According to our database: Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515 W) has higher module efficiency (23.83% vs 23.36%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) and Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)?
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505 W) has a module efficiency of 23.36%, while Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515 W) is 23.83%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) use vs Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)?
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505 W) uses TOPCon cells; Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515 W) 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 Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) and Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W)?
Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505 W) has a 30 years power warranty; Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515 W) 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 Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505W) and Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515W) bifacial panels?
Both Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (505 W) and Jinko Solar JKM495-520N-51QL6-BDV-F2-EU (515 W) 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 170 Jinko 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.