Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W vs Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
VS
The verdict
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 0.66 pp more efficient. 9 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 10 differencesHow alike are they
9
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
10 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
Difference
Module efficiency
22.93 %
22.27 %
0.66 pp more efficient
Rated power
510 Wp
445 Wp
65 W more power
Power density
229.3 Wp/m²
222.7 Wp/m²
6.6 Wp/m² higher
Weight
27.7 kg
25.0 kg
2.7 kg lighter
Module area
2.224 m²
1.998 m²
0.226 m² apart
Short-circuit current
16.01 A
14.07 A
1.94 A apart
Current at max power
15.12 A
13.60 A
1.52 A apart
Open-circuit voltage
40.57 V
39.53 V
1.04 V apart
Dimensions
1961x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm
Voltage at max power
33.73 V
32.72 V
1.01 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
Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.300 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
17,112 kWh
LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
14,931 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,181 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
510 W
445 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.5% of rated power
487 W
425 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.0% of rated power
464 W
405 W
Hot roof
70 °C
86.5% of rated power
441 W
385 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
510 Wp
445 Wp
+65 W for LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
Module efficiency
22.93 %
22.27 %
+0.66 pp for LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
Power density
229.3 Wp/m²
222.7 Wp/m²
+6.6 Wp/m² for LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W
Open-circuit voltage
40.57 V
39.53 V
1.04 V apart
Voltage at max power
33.73 V
32.72 V
1.01 V apart
Short-circuit current
16.01 A
14.07 A
1.94 A apart
Current at max power
15.12 A
13.60 A
1.52 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.300 %/°C
-0.300 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
1961x1134x30 mm
1762x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm
Module area
2.224 m²
1.998 m²
0.226 m² apart
Weight
27.7 kg
25.0 kg
-2.7 kg for LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W
Weight per kWp
54.3 kg/kWp
56.2 kg/kWp
Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
25 yrs
25 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.40 %/yr
Same
Technology
Cell technology
TOPCon
TOPCon
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
108
108
Same
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,129 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#2,395
vs
#5,544
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W leads by 3,149 places
Power density
#2,397
vs
#5,365
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W leads by 2,968 places
Heat behaviour
#6,152
vs
#6,152
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#8,655
vs
#10,542
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W leads by 1,887 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#3,737
vs
#6,817
LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W leads by 3,080 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W vs Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-505W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W vs Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-500W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W vs Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-495W
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W vs Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-490W
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W vs Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-450W
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Leapton
Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W vs Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-440W
One difference: module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W or Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W?
According to our database: Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510 W has higher module efficiency (22.93% vs 22.27%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W and Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W?
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510 W has a module efficiency of 22.93%, while Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445 W is 22.27%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W use vs Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W?
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510 W uses TOPCon cells; Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445 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 Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W and Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W?
Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510 W has a 30 years power warranty; Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445 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 Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510W and Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445W bifacial panels?
Both Leapton LP182*210-M-54-NB-510 W and Leapton LP182*182-M-54-NB-445 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 9 Leapton 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.

