Skip to main content
565 TB M10_1A vs 560 TB M10_1A 18 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A

Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A
Premier Energies
PE-565 TB M10_1A
565 Wp 21.86 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A
Premier Energies
PE-560 TB M10_1A
560 Wp 21.66 % TOPCon Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

565 TB M10_1A leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 0.20 pp more efficient. 18 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See the one difference
How alike are they
18 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

1 of 19 parameters
Parameter 565 TB M10_1A 560 TB M10_1A Difference
Module efficiency 21.86 % 21.66 % 0.20 pp more efficient
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.
565 TB M10_1A
18,957 kWh
560 TB M10_1A
18,789 kWh
Lifetime gap
168 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario 565 TB M10_1A 560 TB M10_1A
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 565 W 560 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 540 W 535 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 514 W 510 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 489 W 484 W
03

Full specification

Parameter 565 TB M10_1A 560 TB M10_1A Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 565 Wp 560 Wp Effectively the same
Module efficiency 21.86 % 21.66 % +0.20 pp for 565 TB M10_1A
Power density 218.7 Wp/m² 216.8 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 51.22 V 51.18 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 43.95 V 43.90 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 13.50 A 13.40 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 12.86 A 12.76 A Effectively the same
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 28.0 kg 28.0 kg Same
Weight per kWp 49.6 kg/kWp 50.0 kg/kWp Effectively the same
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
#6,962 vs #7,615
565 TB M10_1A leads by 653 places
Power density
#6,841 vs #7,452
565 TB M10_1A leads by 611 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093 vs #6,093
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#3,126 vs #3,298
565 TB M10_1A leads by 172 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#5,619 vs #5,986
565 TB M10_1A leads by 367 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-590 TB M10_1A
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-585 TB M10_1A
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-580 TB M10_1A
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-575 TB M10_1A
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-570 TB M10_1A
The same specification on paper
Same manufacturer
Premier Energies
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A vs Premier Energies PE-590TBBG-144
7 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A or Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A?
According to our database: Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A has higher module efficiency (21.86% 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-565 TB M10_1A and Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A has a module efficiency of 21.86%, while Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A is 21.66%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A use vs Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A uses TOPCon cells; Premier Energies PE-560 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-565 TB M10_1A and Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A?
Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A has a 30 years power warranty; Premier Energies PE-560 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-565 TB M10_1A and Premier Energies PE-560 TB M10_1A bifacial panels?
Both Premier Energies PE-565 TB M10_1A and Premier Energies PE-560 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.