--- title: "Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 - Solar Panel Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 side by side: what actually differs, output when it is hot, thirty-year production, and the full specification." source: "https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh132h10-740" updated: 2026-09-11 --- # Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 DH132H10-740 leads on the differences that matter The largest is module efficiency: 1.10 pp more efficient. 5 of 19 comparable parameters are identical. ## The two panels | Attribute | A | B | | --- | --- | --- | | Panel | [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505) | [Runergy HY-DH132H10-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-740) | | Manufacturer | Runergy | Runergy | | Power | 505 Wp | 740 Wp | | Efficiency | 22.70 % | 23.80 % | | Technology | N-type | HJT | ## Where they differ Ranked by how much the difference matters, not by datasheet order. | Parameter | DH108N11-505 | DH132H10-740 | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Module efficiency | 22.70 % | 23.80 % | +1.10 pp for DH132H10-740 | | Rated power | 505 Wp | 740 Wp | +235 W for DH132H10-740 | | Temperature coefficient | -0.290 %/°C | -0.260 %/°C | +0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-740 | | Power density | 227.1 Wp/m² | 238.2 Wp/m² | +11.1 Wp/m² for DH132H10-740 | | Weight | 27.5 kg | 38.3 kg | -10.8 kg for DH108N11-505 | | Open-circuit voltage | 40.29 V | 51.34 V | 11.05 V apart | | Short-circuit current | 15.88 A | 17.91 A | 2.03 A apart | | Module area | 2.224 m² | 3.106 m² | 0.883 m² apart | | Cell technology | N-type | HJT | N-type vs HJT | | Weight per kWp | 54.5 kg/kWp | 51.8 kg/kWp | -2.7 kg/kWp for DH132H10-740 | | Voltage at max power | 33.49 V | 43.25 V | 9.76 V apart | | Current at max power | 15.08 A | 17.11 A | 2.03 A apart | | Cell count | 108 | 132 | 24 cells apart | | Dimensions | 1961x1134x30 mm | 2384x1303x33 mm | 1961x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm | ## Every compared parameter | Parameter | DH108N11-505 | DH132H10-740 | | --- | --- | --- | | Rated power | 505 Wp | 740 Wp | | Module efficiency | 22.70 % | 23.80 % | | Power density | 227.1 Wp/m² | 238.2 Wp/m² | | Open-circuit voltage | 40.29 V | 51.34 V | | Voltage at max power | 33.49 V | 43.25 V | | Short-circuit current | 15.88 A | 17.91 A | | Current at max power | 15.08 A | 17.11 A | | Temperature coefficient | -0.290 %/°C | -0.260 %/°C | | Dimensions | 1961x1134x30 mm | 2384x1303x33 mm | | Module area | 2.224 m² | 3.106 m² | | Weight | 27.5 kg | 38.3 kg | | Weight per kWp | 54.5 kg/kWp | 51.8 kg/kWp | | Product warranty | 12 yrs | 12 yrs | | Performance warranty | 30 yrs | 30 yrs | | Annual degradation | 0.40 %/yr | 0.38 %/yr | | Cell technology | N-type | HJT | | Cell type | Monocrystalline | Monocrystalline | | Cell count | 108 | 132 | | Bifacial | Yes | Yes | ## Thirty-year yield Each panel's own declared degradation curve, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year - **Cumulative output, DH108N11-505:** 16,944 kWh - **Cumulative output, DH132H10-740:** 24,906 kWh - **Gap:** 7,962 kWh ## Output when hot | Condition | Cell temperature | DH108N11-505 | DH132H10-740 | Retained | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Standard test conditions | 25 °C | 505 W | 740 W | 100.0% of rated power | | Cool, bright day | 40 °C | 483 W | 711 W | 95.7% of rated power | | Typical summer roof | 55 °C | 461 W | 682 W | 91.3% of rated power | | Hot roof | 70 °C | 439 W | 653 W | 87.0% of rated power | ## Against the whole database | Measure | DH108N11-505 | DH132H10-740 | Out of | Note | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Efficiency | #3,266 | #429 | 13,953 | DH132H10-740 leads by 2,837 places | | Power density | #3,271 | #427 | 13,953 | DH132H10-740 leads by 2,844 places | | Heat behaviour | #2,146 | #511 | 13,953 | DH132H10-740 leads by 1,635 places | | Weight | #8,751 | #5,095 | 13,953 | DH132H10-740 leads by 3,656 places | | Warranty | #21 | #21 | 13,953 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Overall | #6,799 | #178 | 13,953 | DH132H10-740 leads by 6,621 places | ## Questions ### Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 or Runergy HY-DH132H10-740? According to our database: **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** has higher module efficiency (**23.80%** vs **22.70%**); **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** tolerates heat better (temp coeff **-0.260%/°C** vs **-0.290%/°C**). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture. ### What is the efficiency of Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-740? **Runergy HY-DH108N11-505** has a module efficiency of **22.70%**, while **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** is **23.80%**. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited. ### What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 use vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740? **Runergy HY-DH108N11-505** uses **N-type** cells; **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** uses **HJT**. 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 Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-740? **Runergy HY-DH108N11-505** has a **30 years** power warranty; **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** 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 Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 bifacial panels? Both **Runergy HY-DH108N11-505** and **Runergy HY-DH132H10-740** 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. ## Related comparisons - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-530](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-530) - 5 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-525](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-525) - 5 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-520](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-520) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-515](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-515) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-510](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-510) - One difference: module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N11-505 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-500](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh108n11-500) - One difference: module efficiency --- Source: https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n11-505/runergy-hy-dh132h10-740 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.