--- title: "Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730 - Solar Panel Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730 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-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132n10-730" updated: 2026-09-11 --- # Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730 DH132H10-735 leads on the differences that matter The largest is temperature coefficient: 0.030 %/°C better in heat. 12 of 19 comparable parameters are identical. ## The two panels | Attribute | A | B | | --- | --- | --- | | Panel | [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735) | [Runergy HY-DH132N10-730](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132n10-730) | | Manufacturer | Runergy | Runergy | | Power | 735 Wp | 730 Wp | | Efficiency | 23.70 % | 23.50 % | | Technology | HJT | N-type | ## Where they differ Ranked by how much the difference matters, not by datasheet order. | Parameter | DH132H10-735 | DH132N10-730 | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Temperature coefficient | -0.260 %/°C | -0.290 %/°C | +0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-735 | | Cell technology | HJT | N-type | HJT vs N-type | | Module efficiency | 23.70 % | 23.50 % | +0.20 pp for DH132H10-735 | | Short-circuit current | 17.85 A | 18.59 A | 0.74 A apart | | Open-circuit voltage | 51.19 V | 49.77 V | 1.42 V apart | | Dimensions | 2384x1303x33 mm | 2384x1303x35 mm | 2384x1303x33 mm vs 2384x1303x35 mm | | Voltage at max power | 43.11 V | 41.67 V | 1.44 V apart | ## Every compared parameter | Parameter | DH132H10-735 | DH132N10-730 | | --- | --- | --- | | Rated power | 735 Wp | 730 Wp | | Module efficiency | 23.70 % | 23.50 % | | Power density | 236.6 Wp/m² | 235.0 Wp/m² | | Open-circuit voltage | 51.19 V | 49.77 V | | Voltage at max power | 43.11 V | 41.67 V | | Short-circuit current | 17.85 A | 18.59 A | | Current at max power | 17.05 A | 17.52 A | | Temperature coefficient | -0.260 %/°C | -0.290 %/°C | | Dimensions | 2384x1303x33 mm | 2384x1303x35 mm | | Module area | 3.106 m² | 3.106 m² | | Weight | 38.3 kg | 38.5 kg | | Weight per kWp | 52.1 kg/kWp | 52.7 kg/kWp | | Product warranty | 12 yrs | 12 yrs | | Performance warranty | 30 yrs | 30 yrs | | Annual degradation | 0.38 %/yr | 0.40 %/yr | | Cell technology | HJT | N-type | | Cell type | Monocrystalline | Monocrystalline | | Cell count | 132 | 132 | | Bifacial | Yes | Yes | ## Thirty-year yield Each panel's own declared degradation curve, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year - **Cumulative output, DH132H10-735:** 24,737 kWh - **Cumulative output, DH132N10-730:** 24,493 kWh - **Gap:** 244 kWh ## Output when hot | Condition | Cell temperature | DH132H10-735 | DH132N10-730 | Retained | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Standard test conditions | 25 °C | 735 W | 730 W | 100.0% of rated power | | Cool, bright day | 40 °C | 706 W | 698 W | 95.7% of rated power | | Typical summer roof | 55 °C | 678 W | 666 W | 91.3% of rated power | | Hot roof | 70 °C | 649 W | 635 W | 87.0% of rated power | ## Against the whole database | Measure | DH132H10-735 | DH132N10-730 | Out of | Note | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Efficiency | #517 | #716 | 14,005 | DH132H10-735 leads by 199 places | | Power density | #582 | #800 | 14,005 | DH132H10-735 leads by 218 places | | Heat behaviour | #511 | #2,165 | 14,005 | DH132H10-735 leads by 1,654 places | | Weight | #5,576 | #6,396 | 14,005 | DH132H10-735 leads by 820 places | | Warranty | #21 | #21 | 14,005 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Overall | #233 | #322 | 14,005 | DH132H10-735 leads by 89 places | ## Questions ### Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 or Runergy HY-DH132N10-730? According to our database: **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** has higher module efficiency (**23.70%** vs **23.50%**); **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** 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-DH132H10-735 and Runergy HY-DH132N10-730? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** has a module efficiency of **23.70%**, while **Runergy HY-DH132N10-730** is **23.50%**. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited. ### What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 use vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** uses **HJT** cells; **Runergy HY-DH132N10-730** 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-DH132H10-735 and Runergy HY-DH132N10-730? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** has a **30 years** power warranty; **Runergy HY-DH132N10-730** 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-DH132H10-735 and Runergy HY-DH132N10-730 bifacial panels? Both **Runergy HY-DH132H10-735** and **Runergy HY-DH132N10-730** 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-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-740) - The same specification on paper - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740) - One difference: dimensions - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-735](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-735) - One difference: dimensions - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-730) - One difference: module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-730](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-730) - 2 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-725](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132h10-725) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency --- Source: https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-735/runergy-hy-dh132n10-730 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.