--- title: "Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730 - Solar Panel Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730 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-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh132h10-730" updated: 2026-09-12 --- # Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730 DH132H10-730 leads on the differences that matter The largest is module efficiency: 1.20 pp more efficient. 5 of 19 comparable parameters are identical. ## The two panels | Attribute | A | B | | --- | --- | --- | | Panel | [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435) | [Runergy HY-DH132H10-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-730) | | Manufacturer | Runergy | Runergy | | Power | 435 Wp | 730 Wp | | Efficiency | 22.30 % | 23.50 % | | Technology | N-type | HJT | ## Where they differ Ranked by how much the difference matters, not by datasheet order. | Parameter | DH108N8B-435 | DH132H10-730 | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Module efficiency | 22.30 % | 23.50 % | +1.20 pp for DH132H10-730 | | Rated power | 435 Wp | 730 Wp | +295 W for DH132H10-730 | | Power density | 222.8 Wp/m² | 235.0 Wp/m² | +12.2 Wp/m² for DH132H10-730 | | Temperature coefficient | -0.290 %/°C | -0.260 %/°C | +0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-730 | | Weight | 24.2 kg | 38.3 kg | -14.1 kg for DH108N8B-435 | | Open-circuit voltage | 38.97 V | 51.04 V | 12.07 V apart | | Short-circuit current | 13.80 A | 17.79 A | 3.99 A apart | | Module area | 1.953 m² | 3.106 m² | 1.154 m² apart | | Cell technology | N-type | HJT | N-type vs HJT | | Weight per kWp | 55.6 kg/kWp | 52.5 kg/kWp | -3.2 kg/kWp for DH132H10-730 | | Voltage at max power | 33.03 V | 42.97 V | 9.94 V apart | | Current at max power | 13.17 A | 16.99 A | 3.82 A apart | | Cell count | 108 | 132 | 24 cells apart | | Dimensions | 1722x1134x30 mm | 2384x1303x33 mm | 1722x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm | ## Every compared parameter | Parameter | DH108N8B-435 | DH132H10-730 | | --- | --- | --- | | Rated power | 435 Wp | 730 Wp | | Module efficiency | 22.30 % | 23.50 % | | Power density | 222.8 Wp/m² | 235.0 Wp/m² | | Open-circuit voltage | 38.97 V | 51.04 V | | Voltage at max power | 33.03 V | 42.97 V | | Short-circuit current | 13.80 A | 17.79 A | | Current at max power | 13.17 A | 16.99 A | | Temperature coefficient | -0.290 %/°C | -0.260 %/°C | | Dimensions | 1722x1134x30 mm | 2384x1303x33 mm | | Module area | 1.953 m² | 3.106 m² | | Weight | 24.2 kg | 38.3 kg | | Weight per kWp | 55.6 kg/kWp | 52.5 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, DH108N8B-435:** 14,595 kWh - **Cumulative output, DH132H10-730:** 24,569 kWh - **Gap:** 9,974 kWh ## Output when hot | Condition | Cell temperature | DH108N8B-435 | DH132H10-730 | Retained | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Standard test conditions | 25 °C | 435 W | 730 W | 100.0% of rated power | | Cool, bright day | 40 °C | 416 W | 702 W | 95.7% of rated power | | Typical summer roof | 55 °C | 397 W | 673 W | 91.3% of rated power | | Hot roof | 70 °C | 378 W | 645 W | 87.0% of rated power | ## Against the whole database | Measure | DH108N8B-435 | DH132H10-730 | Out of | Note | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Efficiency | #5,100 | #716 | 14,005 | DH132H10-730 leads by 4,384 places | | Power density | #5,150 | #800 | 14,005 | DH132H10-730 leads by 4,350 places | | Heat behaviour | #2,165 | #511 | 14,005 | DH132H10-730 leads by 1,654 places | | Weight | #10,001 | #5,993 | 14,005 | DH132H10-730 leads by 4,008 places | | Warranty | #21 | #21 | 14,005 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Overall | #9,745 | #312 | 14,005 | DH132H10-730 leads by 9,433 places | ## Questions ### Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 or Runergy HY-DH132H10-730? According to our database: **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** has higher module efficiency (**23.50%** vs **22.30%**); **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** 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-DH108N8B-435 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-730? **Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435** has a module efficiency of **22.30%**, while **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** is **23.50%**. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited. ### What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 use vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730? **Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435** uses **N-type** cells; **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** 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-DH108N8B-435 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-730? **Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435** has a **30 years** power warranty; **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** 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-DH108N8B-435 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-730 bifacial panels? Both **Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435** and **Runergy HY-DH132H10-730** 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-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8B-450](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-450) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8-450](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8-450) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8B-445](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-445) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8-445](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8-445) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8B-440](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-440) - One difference: module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH108N8B-435 vs Runergy HY-DH108N8-440](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh108n8-440) - One difference: module efficiency --- Source: https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh108n8b-435/runergy-hy-dh132h10-730 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.