Skip to main content
725 vs 735 16 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-735

Runergy
HY-DH132H10-725
725 Wp 23.30 % HJT Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Runergy
HY-DH132H10-735
735 Wp 23.70 % HJT Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

735 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 0.40 pp more efficient. 16 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 3 differences
How alike are they
16 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

3 of 19 parameters
Parameter 725 735 Difference
Module efficiency 23.30 % 23.70 % 0.40 pp more efficient
Power density 233.4 Wp/m² 236.6 Wp/m² 3.2 Wp/m² higher
Rated power 725 Wp 735 Wp 10 W more power
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 (-0.260 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
725
24,401 kWh
735
24,737 kWh
Lifetime gap
336 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario 725 735
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 725 W 735 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 96.1% of rated power 697 W 706 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 92.2% of rated power 668 W 678 W
Hot roof 70 °C 88.3% of rated power 640 W 649 W
03

Full specification

Parameter 725 735 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 725 Wp 735 Wp +10 W for 735
Module efficiency 23.30 % 23.70 % +0.40 pp for 735
Power density 233.4 Wp/m² 236.6 Wp/m² +3.2 Wp/m² for 735
Open-circuit voltage 50.89 V 51.19 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 42.83 V 43.11 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 17.73 A 17.85 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 16.93 A 17.05 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.260 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 2384x1303x33 mm Same
Module area 3.106 m² 3.106 m² Same
Weight 38.3 kg 38.3 kg Same
Weight per kWp 52.8 kg/kWp 52.1 kg/kWp Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 12 yrs 12 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.38 %/yr 0.38 %/yr Same
Technology
Cell technology HJT HJT Same
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 132 Same
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#1,017 vs #517
735 leads by 500 places
Power density
#936 vs #582
735 leads by 354 places
Heat behaviour
#511 vs #511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#6,514 vs #5,576
735 leads by 938 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#424 vs #233
735 leads by 191 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-735
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730
8 differences, the largest is temperature coefficient
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-730
2 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 or Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
According to our database: Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 has higher module efficiency (23.70% vs 23.30%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 has a module efficiency of 23.30%, while Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 is 23.70%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 use vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 uses HJT cells; Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 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-DH132H10-725 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 has a 30 years power warranty; Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 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-DH132H10-725 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 bifacial panels?
Both Runergy HY-DH132H10-725 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 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.