--- title: "Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B - Solar Panel Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B side by side: what actually differs, output when it is hot, thirty-year production, and the full specification." source: "https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-msx10-435hn0b" updated: 2026-09-11 --- # Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B MST12R620HN3G leads on the differences that matter The largest is module efficiency: 0.70 pp more efficient. 4 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it. ## The two panels | Attribute | A | B | | --- | --- | --- | | Panel | [Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G](https://comparepv.com/panel/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g) | [Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B](https://comparepv.com/panel/mission-solar-msx10-435hn0b) | | Manufacturer | Mission Solar | Mission Solar | | Power | 620 Wp | 435 Wp | | Efficiency | 23.00 % | 22.30 % | | Technology | N-type | N-type | ## Where they differ Ranked by how much the difference matters, not by datasheet order. | Parameter | MST12R620HN3G | MSX10-435HN0B | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Module efficiency | 23.00 % | 22.30 % | +0.70 pp for MST12R620HN3G | | Rated power | 620 Wp | 435 Wp | +185 W for MST12R620HN3G | | Weight | 33.0 kg | 21.3 kg | -11.7 kg for MSX10-435HN0B | | Power density | 229.5 Wp/m² | 222.8 Wp/m² | +6.8 Wp/m² for MST12R620HN3G | | Open-circuit voltage | 48.50 V | 39.56 V | 8.94 V apart | | Short-circuit current | 16.26 A | 13.79 A | 2.47 A apart | | Module area | 2.701 m² | 1.953 m² | 0.748 m² apart | | Weight per kWp | 53.2 kg/kWp | 49.0 kg/kWp | -4.3 kg/kWp for MSX10-435HN0B | | Voltage at max power | 40.24 V | 33.31 V | 6.93 V apart | | Current at max power | 15.41 A | 13.07 A | 2.34 A apart | | Cell count | 132 | 108 | 24 cells apart | | Annual degradation | 0.40 %/yr | 0.45 %/yr | -0.05 %/yr for MST12R620HN3G | | Bifacial | Yes | No | Yes vs No | | Dimensions | 2382x1134x30 mm | 1722x1134x35 mm | 2382x1134x30 mm vs 1722x1134x35 mm | ## Every compared parameter | Parameter | MST12R620HN3G | MSX10-435HN0B | | --- | --- | --- | | Rated power | 620 Wp | 435 Wp | | Module efficiency | 23.00 % | 22.30 % | | Power density | 229.5 Wp/m² | 222.8 Wp/m² | | Open-circuit voltage | 48.50 V | 39.56 V | | Voltage at max power | 40.24 V | 33.31 V | | Short-circuit current | 16.26 A | 13.79 A | | Current at max power | 15.41 A | 13.07 A | | Temperature coefficient | -0.290 %/°C | -0.290 %/°C | | Dimensions | 2382x1134x30 mm | 1722x1134x35 mm | | Module area | 2.701 m² | 1.953 m² | | Weight | 33.0 kg | 21.3 kg | | Weight per kWp | 53.2 kg/kWp | 49.0 kg/kWp | | Product warranty | - | 25 yrs | | Performance warranty | 30 yrs | 30 yrs | | Annual degradation | 0.40 %/yr | 0.45 %/yr | | Cell technology | N-type | N-type | | Cell type | Monocrystalline | Monocrystalline | | Cell count | 132 | 108 | | Bifacial | Yes | No | ## Thirty-year yield 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. - **Cumulative output, MST12R620HN3G:** 20,802 kWh - **Cumulative output, MSX10-435HN0B:** 14,482 kWh - **Gap:** 6,320 kWh ## Output when hot | Condition | Cell temperature | MST12R620HN3G | MSX10-435HN0B | Retained | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Standard test conditions | 25 °C | 620 W | 435 W | 100.0% of rated power | | Cool, bright day | 40 °C | 593 W | 416 W | 95.7% of rated power | | Typical summer roof | 55 °C | 566 W | 397 W | 91.3% of rated power | | Hot roof | 70 °C | 539 W | 378 W | 87.0% of rated power | ## Against the whole database | Measure | MST12R620HN3G | MSX10-435HN0B | Out of | Note | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Efficiency | #1,919 | #5,100 | 14,005 | MST12R620HN3G leads by 3,181 places | | Power density | #2,191 | #5,150 | 14,005 | MST12R620HN3G leads by 2,959 places | | Heat behaviour | #2,165 | #2,165 | 14,005 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Weight | #7,064 | #2,656 | 14,005 | MSX10-435HN0B leads by 4,408 places | | Warranty | #21 | #21 | 14,005 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Overall | #4,968 | #6,928 | 14,005 | MST12R620HN3G leads by 1,960 places | ## Questions ### Which panel is better: Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G or Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B? According to our database: **Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G** has higher module efficiency (**23.00%** vs **22.30%**). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture. ### What is the efficiency of Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G and Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B? **Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G** has a module efficiency of **23.00%**, while **Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B** is **22.30%**. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited. ### What cell technology does Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G use vs Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B? **Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G** uses **N-type** cells; **Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B** 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 Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G and Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B? **Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G** has a **30 years** power warranty; **Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B** 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 Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G and Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B bifacial panels? **Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G** is bifacial (captures light from both faces); **Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B** is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath. ## Related comparisons - [Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MST12R615HN3G](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-mst12r615hn3g) - One difference: module efficiency - [Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MST12R610HN3G](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-mst12r610hn3g) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B vs Mission Solar MSX10-445HN0B](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-msx10-435hn0b/mission-solar-msx10-445hn0b) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Mission Solar MSX10-435HN0B vs Mission Solar MSX10-440HN0B](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-msx10-435hn0b/mission-solar-msx10-440hn0b) - One difference: module efficiency - [Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MST12670HP3G](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-mst12670hp3g) - 14 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Mission Solar MST12R620HN3G vs Mission Solar MST12665HP3G](https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-mst12665hp3g) - 14 differences, the largest is module efficiency --- Source: https://comparepv.com/compare/mission-solar-mst12r620hn3g/mission-solar-msx10-435hn0b Not in this file, on the page: the thirty-year yield curve year by year at a cell temperature you pick and a written summary generated on request.