Skip to main content
SA500M (FB) vs OR10H595MNDB 5 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

Peimar SA500M (FB) vs Peimar OR10H595MNDB

Peimar
SA500M (FB)
500 Wp 21.33 % PERC Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Peimar
OR10H595MNDB
595 Wp 23.03 % TOPCon Bifacial Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

OR10H595MNDB leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 1.70 pp more efficient. 5 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See all 13 differences
How alike are they
5 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

13 of 18 parameters
Parameter SA500M (FB) OR10H595MNDB Difference
Module efficiency 21.33 % 23.03 % 1.70 pp more efficient
Rated power 500 Wp 595 Wp 95 W more power
Power density 213.3 Wp/m² 230.3 Wp/m² 17.0 Wp/m² higher
Weight 23.4 kg 30.0 kg 6.6 kg lighter
Product warranty 30 yrs 25 yrs 5 yrs longer
Open-circuit voltage 46.46 V 53.12 V 6.66 V apart
Module area 2.344 m² 2.583 m² 0.239 m² apart
Weight per kWp 46.8 kg/kWp 50.4 kg/kWp 3.6 kg/kWp lighter
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Voltage at max power 37.77 V 44.48 V 6.71 V apart
Cell count 66 144 78 cells apart
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
Dimensions 2067x1134x35 mm 2278x1134x30 mm 2067x1134x35 mm vs 2278x1134x30 mm
02

What it means on a roof

Thirty years of production
A 1.0% first-year loss then 0.40% a year, assumed for both panels, 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.
SA500M (FB)
16,776 kWh
OR10H595MNDB
19,963 kWh
Lifetime gap
3,187 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario SA500M (FB) OR10H595MNDB
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 500 W 595 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 478 W 569 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 457 W 543 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 435 W 517 W
03

Full specification

Parameter SA500M (FB) OR10H595MNDB Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 500 Wp 595 Wp +95 W for OR10H595MNDB
Module efficiency 21.33 % 23.03 % +1.70 pp for OR10H595MNDB
Power density 213.3 Wp/m² 230.3 Wp/m² +17.0 Wp/m² for OR10H595MNDB
Open-circuit voltage 46.46 V 53.12 V 6.66 V apart
Voltage at max power 37.77 V 44.48 V 6.71 V apart
Short-circuit current 14.03 A 14.13 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 13.24 A 13.38 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.290 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2067x1134x35 mm 2278x1134x30 mm 2067x1134x35 mm vs 2278x1134x30 mm
Module area 2.344 m² 2.583 m² 0.239 m² apart
Weight 23.4 kg 30.0 kg -6.6 kg for SA500M (FB)
Weight per kWp 46.8 kg/kWp 50.4 kg/kWp -3.6 kg/kWp for SA500M (FB)
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 30 yrs 25 yrs +5 yrs for SA500M (FB)
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation - - Neither datasheet publishes this
Technology
Cell technology PERC TOPCon PERC vs TOPCon
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 66 144 78 cells apart
Bifacial No Yes No vs Yes
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#8,476 vs #1,744
OR10H595MNDB leads by 6,732 places
Power density
#8,438 vs #1,758
OR10H595MNDB leads by 6,680 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165 vs #2,165
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#1,355 vs #3,800
SA500M (FB) leads by 2,445 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,753 vs #1,378
OR10H595MNDB leads by 3,375 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Peimar
Peimar OR10H595MNDB vs Peimar OR10H450MNDB (FB)
7 differences, the largest is rated power
Same manufacturer
Peimar
Peimar SA500M (FB) vs Peimar SG330P
14 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Peimar
Peimar SA500M (FB) vs Peimar SG325P
14 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Peimar SA500M (FB) or Peimar OR10H595MNDB?
According to our database: Peimar OR10H595MNDB has higher module efficiency (23.03% vs 21.33%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Peimar SA500M (FB) and Peimar OR10H595MNDB?
Peimar SA500M (FB) has a module efficiency of 21.33%, while Peimar OR10H595MNDB is 23.03%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Peimar SA500M (FB) use vs Peimar OR10H595MNDB?
Peimar SA500M (FB) uses PERC cells; Peimar OR10H595MNDB 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 Peimar SA500M (FB) and Peimar OR10H595MNDB?
Peimar SA500M (FB) has a 30 years power warranty; Peimar OR10H595MNDB 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 Peimar SA500M (FB) and Peimar OR10H595MNDB bifacial panels?
Peimar OR10H595MNDB is bifacial (captures light from both faces); Peimar SA500M (FB) is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

Shop prices: See 13 Peimar 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.