Skip to main content
DH132H10-740 vs DH96N11B-450 4 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450

Runergy
HY-DH132H10-740
740 Wp 23.80 % HJT Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450
Runergy
HY-DH96N11B-450
450 Wp 22.50 % N-type
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

DH132H10-740 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 1.30 pp more efficient. 4 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 15 differences
How alike are they
4 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

15 of 19 parameters
Parameter DH132H10-740 DH96N11B-450 Difference
Module efficiency 23.80 % 22.50 % 1.30 pp more efficient
Rated power 740 Wp 450 Wp 290 W more power
Power density 238.2 Wp/m² 225.2 Wp/m² 13.0 Wp/m² higher
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.290 %/°C 0.030 %/°C better in heat
Weight 38.3 kg 25.0 kg 13.3 kg lighter
Open-circuit voltage 51.34 V 35.26 V 16.08 V apart
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Short-circuit current 17.91 A 16.07 A 1.84 A apart
Weight per kWp 51.8 kg/kWp 55.6 kg/kWp 3.8 kg/kWp lighter
Cell technology HJT N-type HJT vs N-type
Voltage at max power 43.25 V 29.44 V 13.81 V apart
Cell count 132 96 36 cells apart
Current at max power 17.11 A 15.29 A 1.82 A apart
Bifacial Yes No Yes vs No
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 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
DH96N11B-450
15,098 kWh
Lifetime gap
9,808 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario DH132H10-740 DH96N11B-450
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 740 W 450 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 711 W 430 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 682 W 411 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 653 W 391 W
03

Full specification

Parameter DH132H10-740 DH96N11B-450 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 740 Wp 450 Wp +290 W for DH132H10-740
Module efficiency 23.80 % 22.50 % +1.30 pp for DH132H10-740
Power density 238.2 Wp/m² 225.2 Wp/m² +13.0 Wp/m² for DH132H10-740
Open-circuit voltage 51.34 V 35.26 V 16.08 V apart
Voltage at max power 43.25 V 29.44 V 13.81 V apart
Short-circuit current 17.91 A 16.07 A 1.84 A apart
Current at max power 17.11 A 15.29 A 1.82 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.290 %/°C +0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-740
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 1762x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 1.998 m² 1.108 m² apart
Weight 38.3 kg 25.0 kg -13.3 kg for DH96N11B-450
Weight per kWp 51.8 kg/kWp 55.6 kg/kWp -3.8 kg/kWp for DH132H10-740
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 96 36 cells apart
Bifacial Yes No Yes vs No
04

Against the whole database

14,129 panels
Efficiency
#462 vs #4,281
DH132H10-740 leads by 3,819 places
Power density
#460 vs #4,284
DH132H10-740 leads by 3,824 places
Heat behaviour
#515 vs #2,220
DH132H10-740 leads by 1,705 places
Weight
#5,156 vs #9,992
DH132H10-740 leads by 4,836 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#185 vs #9,181
DH132H10-740 leads by 8,996 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
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

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 or Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450?
According to our database: Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has higher module efficiency (23.80% vs 22.50%); 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-DH96N11B-450?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has a module efficiency of 23.80%, while Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450 is 22.50%. 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-DH96N11B-450?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 uses HJT cells; Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450 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-DH96N11B-450?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 has a 30 years power warranty; Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450 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-DH96N11B-450 bifacial panels?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-740 is bifacial (captures light from both faces); Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450 is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath.

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.