Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-735
VS
The verdict
DH132H10-735 leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 0.70 pp more efficient. 4 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 15 differencesHow alike are they
4
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
15 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
DH96N11B-460
DH132H10-735
Difference
Module efficiency
23.00 %
23.70 %
0.70 pp more efficient
Rated power
460 Wp
735 Wp
275 W more power
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
0.030 %/°C better in heat
Weight
25.0 kg
38.3 kg
13.3 kg lighter
Power density
230.2 Wp/m²
236.6 Wp/m²
6.4 Wp/m² higher
Open-circuit voltage
35.52 V
51.19 V
15.67 V apart
Module area
1.998 m²
3.106 m²
1.108 m² apart
Short-circuit current
16.23 A
17.85 A
1.62 A apart
Cell technology
N-type
HJT
N-type vs HJT
Voltage at max power
29.70 V
43.11 V
13.41 V apart
Cell count
96
132
36 cells apart
Weight per kWp
54.3 kg/kWp
52.1 kg/kWp
2.2 kg/kWp lighter
Current at max power
15.49 A
17.05 A
1.56 A apart
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
2384x1303x33 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 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
DH96N11B-460
15,434 kWh
DH132H10-735
24,737 kWh
Lifetime gap
9,303 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
DH96N11B-460
DH132H10-735
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
460 W
735 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
95.7% of rated power
440 W
706 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
91.3% of rated power
420 W
678 W
Hot roof
70 °C
87.0% of rated power
400 W
649 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
DH96N11B-460
DH132H10-735
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
460 Wp
735 Wp
+275 W for DH132H10-735
Module efficiency
23.00 %
23.70 %
+0.70 pp for DH132H10-735
Power density
230.2 Wp/m²
236.6 Wp/m²
+6.4 Wp/m² for DH132H10-735
Open-circuit voltage
35.52 V
51.19 V
15.67 V apart
Voltage at max power
29.70 V
43.11 V
13.41 V apart
Short-circuit current
16.23 A
17.85 A
1.62 A apart
Current at max power
15.49 A
17.05 A
1.56 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.260 %/°C
+0.030 %/°C for DH132H10-735
Mechanical
Dimensions
1762x1134x30 mm
2384x1303x33 mm
1762x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area
1.998 m²
3.106 m²
1.108 m² apart
Weight
25.0 kg
38.3 kg
-13.3 kg for DH96N11B-460
Weight per kWp
54.3 kg/kWp
52.1 kg/kWp
-2.2 kg/kWp for DH132H10-735
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
12 yrs
12 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.38 %/yr
Effectively the same
Technology
Cell technology
N-type
HJT
N-type vs HJT
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
96
132
36 cells apart
Bifacial
No
Yes
No vs Yes
04
14,129 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#1,970
vs
#549
DH132H10-735 leads by 1,421 places
Power density
#1,927
vs
#614
DH132H10-735 leads by 1,313 places
Heat behaviour
#2,220
vs
#515
DH132H10-735 leads by 1,705 places
Weight
#8,717
vs
#5,616
DH132H10-735 leads by 3,101 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#8,254
vs
#234
DH132H10-735 leads by 8,020 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-465
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-455
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-450
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 vs Runergy HY-DH96N11B-445
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-740
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Runergy
Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-Plus-740
One difference: dimensions
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 or Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
According to our database: Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 has higher module efficiency (23.70% vs 23.00%); 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-DH96N11B-460 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 has a module efficiency of 23.00%, 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-DH96N11B-460 use vs Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 uses N-type 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-DH96N11B-460 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735?
Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 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-DH96N11B-460 and Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 bifacial panels?
Runergy HY-DH132H10-735 is bifacial (captures light from both faces); Runergy HY-DH96N11B-460 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.