Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-515
VS
The verdict
DH132H10-740 leads on the differences that matter
The largest is rated power: 225 W more power. 6 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 13 differencesHow alike are they
6
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
13 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
DH132H10-740
DH108N11-515
Difference
Rated power
740 Wp
515 Wp
225 W more power
Module efficiency
23.80 %
23.20 %
0.60 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
0.030 %/°C better in heat
Weight
38.3 kg
27.5 kg
10.8 kg lighter
Power density
238.2 Wp/m²
231.6 Wp/m²
6.6 Wp/m² higher
Open-circuit voltage
51.34 V
40.89 V
10.45 V apart
Module area
3.106 m²
2.224 m²
0.883 m² apart
Short-circuit current
17.91 A
15.98 A
1.93 A apart
Cell technology
HJT
N-type
HJT vs N-type
Voltage at max power
43.25 V
33.89 V
9.36 V apart
Cell count
132
108
24 cells apart
Current at max power
17.11 A
15.20 A
1.91 A apart
Dimensions
2384x1303x33 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
2384x1303x33 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
DH132H10-740
24,906 kWh
DH108N11-515
17,279 kWh
Lifetime gap
7,627 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
DH132H10-740
DH108N11-515
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
740 W
515 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
711 W
493 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
682 W
470 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
653 W
448 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
DH132H10-740
DH108N11-515
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
740 Wp
515 Wp
+225 W for DH132H10-740
Module efficiency
23.80 %
23.20 %
+0.60 pp for DH132H10-740
Power density
238.2 Wp/m²
231.6 Wp/m²
+6.6 Wp/m² for DH132H10-740
Open-circuit voltage
51.34 V
40.89 V
10.45 V apart
Voltage at max power
43.25 V
33.89 V
9.36 V apart
Short-circuit current
17.91 A
15.98 A
1.93 A apart
Current at max power
17.11 A
15.20 A
1.91 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.260 %/°C
-0.290 %/°C
+0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-740
Mechanical
Dimensions
2384x1303x33 mm
1961x1134x30 mm
2384x1303x33 mm vs 1961x1134x30 mm
Module area
3.106 m²
2.224 m²
0.883 m² apart
Weight
38.3 kg
27.5 kg
-10.8 kg for DH108N11-515
Weight per kWp
51.8 kg/kWp
53.4 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
0.40 %/yr
Effectively the same
Technology
Cell technology
HJT
N-type
HJT vs N-type
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
132
108
24 cells apart
Bifacial
Yes
Yes
Same
04
14,129 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#462
vs
#1,349
DH132H10-740 leads by 887 places
Power density
#460
vs
#1,518
DH132H10-740 leads by 1,058 places
Heat behaviour
#515
vs
#2,220
DH132H10-740 leads by 1,705 places
Weight
#5,156
vs
#7,387
DH132H10-740 leads by 2,231 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#185
vs
#5,900
DH132H10-740 leads by 5,715 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740
One difference: dimensions
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-735
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-735
One difference: dimensions
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-730
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730
9 differences, the largest is temperature coefficient
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-730
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 or Runergy HY-DH108N11-515?
According to our database: Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has higher module efficiency (23.80% vs 23.20%); 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-DH132H10-740 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-515?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has a module efficiency of 23.80%, while Runergy HY-DH108N11-515 is 23.20%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 use vs Runergy HY-DH108N11-515?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 uses HJT cells; Runergy HY-DH108N11-515 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-DH132H10-740 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-515?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has a 30 years power warranty; Runergy HY-DH108N11-515 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-DH132H10-740 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-515 bifacial panels?
Both Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 and Runergy HY-DH108N11-515 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 5 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.