Skip to main content
560TBBG-144 vs 590 TB M10_1A 12 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A

Premier Energies
PE-560TBBG-144
560 Wp 21.66 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A
Premier Energies
PE-590 TB M10_1A
590 Wp 22.83 % TOPCon Bifacial
The verdict

590 TB M10_1A leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 1.17 pp more efficient. 12 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 7 differences
How alike are they
12 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

7 of 19 parameters
Parameter 560TBBG-144 590 TB M10_1A Difference
Module efficiency 21.66 % 22.83 % 1.17 pp more efficient
Power density 216.8 Wp/m² 228.4 Wp/m² 11.6 Wp/m² higher
Rated power 560 Wp 590 Wp 30 W more power
Weight 34.0 kg 28.0 kg 6.0 kg lighter
Weight per kWp 60.7 kg/kWp 47.5 kg/kWp 13.3 kg/kWp lighter
Short-circuit current 13.40 A 14.04 A 0.64 A apart
Current at max power 12.76 A 13.37 A 0.61 A 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.
560TBBG-144
18,789 kWh
590 TB M10_1A
19,796 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,007 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario 560TBBG-144 590 TB M10_1A
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 560 W 590 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 535 W 563 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 510 W 537 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 484 W 510 W
03

Full specification

Parameter 560TBBG-144 590 TB M10_1A Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 560 Wp 590 Wp +30 W for 590 TB M10_1A
Module efficiency 21.66 % 22.83 % +1.17 pp for 590 TB M10_1A
Power density 216.8 Wp/m² 228.4 Wp/m² +11.6 Wp/m² for 590 TB M10_1A
Open-circuit voltage 51.18 V 51.42 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 43.91 V 44.15 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 13.40 A 14.04 A 0.64 A apart
Current at max power 12.76 A 13.37 A 0.61 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.300 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2278x1134x35 mm 2278x1134x35 mm Same
Module area 2.583 m² 2.583 m² Same
Weight 34.0 kg 28.0 kg -6.0 kg for 590 TB M10_1A
Weight per kWp 60.7 kg/kWp 47.5 kg/kWp -13.3 kg/kWp for 590 TB M10_1A
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 12 yrs 12 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 144 144 Same
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#7,615 vs #2,683
590 TB M10_1A leads by 4,932 places
Power density
#7,452 vs #2,598
590 TB M10_1A leads by 4,854 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093 vs #6,093
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#12,519 vs #1,689
590 TB M10_1A leads by 10,830 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#6,147 vs #3,653
590 TB M10_1A leads by 2,494 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-590TBBG-144
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-585TBBG-144
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-580TBBG-144
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-575TBBG-144
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-570TBBG-144
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 vs Premier Energies PE-565TBBG-144
One difference: module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 or Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A?
According to our database: Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A has higher module efficiency (22.83% vs 21.66%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 and Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 has a module efficiency of 21.66%, while Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A is 22.83%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 use vs Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 uses TOPCon cells; Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A 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 Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 and Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 has a 30 years power warranty; Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A 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 Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 and Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A bifacial panels?
Both Premier Energies PE-560TBBG-144 and Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A 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 1 Premier Energies offer

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.