Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-510
VS
The verdict
DH108N11-510 leads on the differences that matter
The largest is rated power: 75 W more power. 10 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 9 differencesHow alike are they
10
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
9 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
DH108N8-435
DH108N11-510
Difference
Rated power
435 Wp
510 Wp
75 W more power
Module efficiency
22.30 %
22.90 %
0.60 pp more efficient
Weight
24.2 kg
27.5 kg
3.3 kg lighter
Power density
222.8 Wp/m²
229.3 Wp/m²
6.6 Wp/m² higher
Short-circuit current
13.80 A
15.93 A
2.13 A apart
Module area
1.953 m²
2.224 m²
0.271 m² apart
Current at max power
13.17 A
15.14 A
1.97 A apart
Open-circuit voltage
38.97 V
40.59 V
1.62 V apart
Dimensions
1722x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
1722x1134x30 mm vs 1961x1134x30 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
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.
DH108N8-435
14,595 kWh
DH108N11-510
17,112 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,517 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
DH108N8-435
DH108N11-510
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
435 W
510 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
416 W
488 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
397 W
466 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
378 W
443 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
DH108N8-435
DH108N11-510
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
435 Wp
510 Wp
+75 W for DH108N11-510
Module efficiency
22.30 %
22.90 %
+0.60 pp for DH108N11-510
Power density
222.8 Wp/m²
229.3 Wp/m²
+6.6 Wp/m² for DH108N11-510
Open-circuit voltage
38.97 V
40.59 V
1.62 V apart
Voltage at max power
33.03 V
33.69 V
Effectively the same
Short-circuit current
13.80 A
15.93 A
2.13 A apart
Current at max power
13.17 A
15.14 A
1.97 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
Same
Mechanical
Dimensions
1722x1134x30 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
1722x1134x30 mm vs 1961x1134x30 mm
Module area
1.953 m²
2.224 m²
0.271 m² apart
Weight
24.2 kg
27.5 kg
-3.3 kg for DH108N8-435
Weight per kWp
55.6 kg/kWp
53.9 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
N-type
N-type
Same
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
108
108
Same
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#5,100
vs
#2,359
DH108N11-510 leads by 2,741 places
Power density
#5,150
vs
#2,343
DH108N11-510 leads by 2,807 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165
vs
#2,165
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#10,001
vs
#8,073
DH108N11-510 leads by 1,928 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#9,745
vs
#6,407
DH108N11-510 leads by 3,338 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-530
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-525
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-520
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-515
10 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-505
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-500
8 differences, the largest is rated power
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 or Runergy HY-DH108N11-510?
According to our database: Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 has higher module efficiency (22.90% vs 22.30%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-510?
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 has a module efficiency of 22.30%, while Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 is 22.90%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 use vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-510?
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 uses N-type cells; Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 uses N-type. 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-DH108N8-435 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-510?
Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 has a 30 years power warranty; Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 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-DH108N8-435 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 bifacial panels?
Both Runergy HY-DH108N8-435 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-510 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 4 Runergy 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.

