Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX
VS
The verdict
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 1.04 pp more efficient. 6 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 13 differencesHow alike are they
6
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
13 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
RPS2MH72BD585
RPS3MH66BDXXX
Difference
Module efficiency
22.65 %
23.69 %
1.04 pp more efficient
Rated power
585 Wp
640 Wp
55 W more power
Power density
226.5 Wp/m²
236.9 Wp/m²
10.5 Wp/m² higher
Short-circuit current
13.62 A
16.27 A
2.65 A apart
Module area
2.583 m²
2.701 m²
0.118 m² apart
Open-circuit voltage
53.00 V
49.60 V
3.40 V apart
Temperature coefficient
-0.300 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
0.010 %/°C better in heat
Weight per kWp
55.6 kg/kWp
52.3 kg/kWp
3.2 kg/kWp lighter
Current at max power
13.01 A
15.36 A
2.35 A apart
Cell count
144
132
12 cells apart
Voltage at max power
44.97 V
41.70 V
3.27 V apart
Weight
32.5 kg
33.5 kg
1.0 kg lighter
Dimensions
2278x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm
2278x1134x30 mm vs 2382x1134x30 mm
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
RPS2MH72BD585
19,628 kWh
RPS3MH66BDXXX
21,473 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,845 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
RPS2MH72BD585
RPS3MH66BDXXX
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
585 W
640 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.5% of rated power
559 W
612 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.0% of rated power
532 W
584 W
Hot roof
70 °C
86.5% of rated power
506 W
556 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
RPS2MH72BD585
RPS3MH66BDXXX
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
585 Wp
640 Wp
+55 W for RPS3MH66BDXXX
Module efficiency
22.65 %
23.69 %
+1.04 pp for RPS3MH66BDXXX
Power density
226.5 Wp/m²
236.9 Wp/m²
+10.5 Wp/m² for RPS3MH66BDXXX
Open-circuit voltage
53.00 V
49.60 V
3.40 V apart
Voltage at max power
44.97 V
41.70 V
3.27 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.62 A
16.27 A
2.65 A apart
Current at max power
13.01 A
15.36 A
2.35 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.300 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
+0.010 %/°C for RPS3MH66BDXXX
Mechanical
Dimensions
2278x1134x30 mm
2382x1134x30 mm
2278x1134x30 mm vs 2382x1134x30 mm
Module area
2.583 m²
2.701 m²
0.118 m² apart
Weight
32.5 kg
33.5 kg
-1.0 kg for RPS2MH72BD585
Weight per kWp
55.6 kg/kWp
52.3 kg/kWp
-3.2 kg/kWp for RPS3MH66BDXXX
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
132
12 cells apart
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,129 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#3,579
vs
#612
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads by 2,967 places
Power density
#3,557
vs
#553
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads by 3,004 places
Heat behaviour
#6,152
vs
#2,220
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads by 3,932 places
Weight
#9,992
vs
#5,874
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads by 4,118 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,199
vs
#1,555
RPS3MH66BDXXX leads by 2,644 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD590
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD580
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD575
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD570
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS1MH60MBXXX
17 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Renew Photovoltaics
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD560
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 or Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX?
According to our database: Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX has higher module efficiency (23.69% vs 22.65%); Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.290%/°C vs -0.300%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 and Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX?
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 has a module efficiency of 22.65%, while Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX is 23.69%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 use vs Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX?
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 uses TOPCon cells; Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX 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 Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 and Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX?
Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 has a 30 years power warranty; Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX 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 Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 and Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX bifacial panels?
Both Renew Photovoltaics RPS2MH72BD585 and Renew Photovoltaics RPS3MH66BDXXX 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.
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.