--- title: "Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445 - Solar Panel Comparison | ComparePV" description: "Compare Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445 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-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh96n11b-445" image: "https://comparepv.com/og/compare/panels/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh96n11b-445.png" updated: 2026-09-12 --- # Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445 DH132H10-Plus-740 leads on the differences that matter The largest is module efficiency: 1.50 pp more efficient. 4 of 19 comparable parameters are identical. ## The two panels | Attribute | A | B | | --- | --- | --- | | Panel | [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740) | [Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445](https://comparepv.com/panel/runergy-hy-dh96n11b-445) | | Manufacturer | Runergy | Runergy | | Power | 740 Wp | 445 Wp | | Efficiency | 23.80 % | 22.30 % | | Technology | HJT | N-type | ## Where they differ Ranked by how much the difference matters, not by datasheet order. | Parameter | DH132H10-Plus-740 | DH96N11B-445 | Difference | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Module efficiency | 23.80 % | 22.30 % | +1.50 pp for DH132H10-Plus-740 | | Rated power | 740 Wp | 445 Wp | +295 W for DH132H10-Plus-740 | | Power density | 238.2 Wp/m² | 222.7 Wp/m² | +15.5 Wp/m² for DH132H10-Plus-740 | | Temperature coefficient | -0.260 %/°C | -0.290 %/°C | +0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-Plus-740 | | Weight | 38.5 kg | 25.0 kg | -13.5 kg for DH96N11B-445 | | Open-circuit voltage | 51.34 V | 35.12 V | 16.22 V apart | | Module area | 3.106 m² | 1.998 m² | 1.108 m² apart | | Short-circuit current | 17.91 A | 15.99 A | 1.92 A apart | | Weight per kWp | 52.0 kg/kWp | 56.2 kg/kWp | -4.2 kg/kWp for DH132H10-Plus-740 | | Cell technology | HJT | N-type | HJT vs N-type | | Voltage at max power | 43.25 V | 29.30 V | 13.95 V apart | | Cell count | 132 | 96 | 36 cells apart | | Current at max power | 17.11 A | 15.19 A | 1.92 A apart | | Bifacial | Yes | No | Yes vs No | | Dimensions | 2384x1303x35 mm | 1762x1134x30 mm | 2384x1303x35 mm vs 1762x1134x30 mm | ## Every compared parameter | Parameter | DH132H10-Plus-740 | DH96N11B-445 | | --- | --- | --- | | Rated power | 740 Wp | 445 Wp | | Module efficiency | 23.80 % | 22.30 % | | Power density | 238.2 Wp/m² | 222.7 Wp/m² | | Open-circuit voltage | 51.34 V | 35.12 V | | Voltage at max power | 43.25 V | 29.30 V | | Short-circuit current | 17.91 A | 15.99 A | | Current at max power | 17.11 A | 15.19 A | | Temperature coefficient | -0.260 %/°C | -0.290 %/°C | | Dimensions | 2384x1303x35 mm | 1762x1134x30 mm | | Module area | 3.106 m² | 1.998 m² | | Weight | 38.5 kg | 25.0 kg | | Weight per kWp | 52.0 kg/kWp | 56.2 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 | 96 | | Bifacial | Yes | No | ## Thirty-year yield Each panel's own declared degradation curve, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year - **Cumulative output, DH132H10-Plus-740:** 24,906 kWh - **Cumulative output, DH96N11B-445:** 14,931 kWh - **Gap:** 9,975 kWh ## Output when hot | Condition | Cell temperature | DH132H10-Plus-740 | DH96N11B-445 | Retained | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Standard test conditions | 25 °C | 740 W | 445 W | 100.0% of rated power | | Cool, bright day | 40 °C | 711 W | 426 W | 95.7% of rated power | | Typical summer roof | 55 °C | 682 W | 406 W | 91.3% of rated power | | Hot roof | 70 °C | 653 W | 387 W | 87.0% of rated power | ## Against the whole database | Measure | DH132H10-Plus-740 | DH96N11B-445 | Out of | Note | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Efficiency | #462 | #5,161 | 14,129 | DH132H10-Plus-740 leads by 4,699 places | | Power density | #460 | #5,365 | 14,129 | DH132H10-Plus-740 leads by 4,905 places | | Heat behaviour | #515 | #2,220 | 14,129 | DH132H10-Plus-740 leads by 1,705 places | | Weight | #5,511 | #10,542 | 14,129 | DH132H10-Plus-740 leads by 5,031 places | | Warranty | #21 | #21 | 14,129 | Tied - the same position in the database | | Overall | #191 | #9,537 | 14,129 | DH132H10-Plus-740 leads by 9,346 places | ## Questions ### Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 or Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445? According to our database: **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740** has higher module efficiency (**23.80%** vs **22.30%**); **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-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-Plus-740 and Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740** has a module efficiency of **23.80%**, while **Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445** is **22.30%**. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited. ### What cell technology does Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 use vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740** uses **HJT** cells; **Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445** 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-Plus-740 and Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740** has a **30 years** power warranty; **Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445** 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-Plus-740 and Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445 bifacial panels? **Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740** is bifacial (captures light from both faces); **Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445** is monofacial. Bifacial panels work best on ground mounts or raised structures with a light-coloured surface underneath. ## Related comparisons - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-735](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-735) - The same specification on paper - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-730](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132n10-730) - 8 differences, the largest is temperature coefficient - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-730](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-730) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-725](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132n10-725) - 8 differences, the largest is temperature coefficient - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-725](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-725) - 3 differences, the largest is module efficiency - [Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740 vs Runergy HY-DH132N10-720](https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh132n10-720) - 8 differences, the largest is module efficiency --- Source: https://comparepv.com/compare/runergy-hy-dh132h10-plus-740/runergy-hy-dh96n11b-445 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.