Skip to main content
SEG-470-BTB-BG vs SRP-730-BHC-BG 4 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG

SEG-470-BTB-BG
470 Wp 21.71 % TOPCon Bifacial
VS
Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG
SRP-730-BHC-BG
730 Wp 23.50 % HJT Bifacial
The verdict

SRP-730-BHC-BG leads on the differences that matter

The largest is module efficiency: 1.79 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 SEG-470-BTB-BG SRP-730-BHC-BG Difference
Module efficiency 21.71 % 23.50 % 1.79 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.258 %/°C 0.042 %/°C better in heat
Rated power 470 Wp 730 Wp 260 W more power
Power density 217.1 Wp/m² 235.0 Wp/m² 17.9 Wp/m² higher
Weight 27.3 kg 38.5 kg 11.2 kg lighter
Weight per kWp 58.1 kg/kWp 52.7 kg/kWp 5.3 kg/kWp lighter
Annual degradation 0.40 %/yr 0.30 %/yr 0.10 %/yr slower
Open-circuit voltage 42.80 V 51.12 V 8.32 V apart
Short-circuit current 13.88 A 17.80 A 3.92 A apart
Module area 2.165 m² 3.106 m² 0.942 m² apart
Cell technology TOPCon HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Voltage at max power 35.60 V 43.10 V 7.50 V apart
Current at max power 13.21 A 17.00 A 3.79 A apart
Cell count 120 132 12 cells apart
Dimensions 1909x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 1909x1134x30 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
SEG-470-BTB-BG
15,499 kWh
SRP-730-BHC-BG
24,874 kWh
Lifetime gap
9,375 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario SEG-470-BTB-BG SRP-730-BHC-BG
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 470 W 730 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.5% of rated power 449 W 702 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.0% of rated power 428 W 673 W
Hot roof 70 °C 86.5% of rated power 407 W 645 W
03

Full specification

Parameter SEG-470-BTB-BG SRP-730-BHC-BG Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 470 Wp 730 Wp +260 W for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Module efficiency 21.71 % 23.50 % +1.79 pp for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Power density 217.1 Wp/m² 235.0 Wp/m² +17.9 Wp/m² for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Open-circuit voltage 42.80 V 51.12 V 8.32 V apart
Voltage at max power 35.60 V 43.10 V 7.50 V apart
Short-circuit current 13.88 A 17.80 A 3.92 A apart
Current at max power 13.21 A 17.00 A 3.79 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.300 %/°C -0.258 %/°C +0.042 %/°C for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Mechanical
Dimensions 1909x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 1909x1134x30 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area 2.165 m² 3.106 m² 0.942 m² apart
Weight 27.3 kg 38.5 kg -11.2 kg for SEG-470-BTB-BG
Weight per kWp 58.1 kg/kWp 52.7 kg/kWp -5.3 kg/kWp for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 15 yrs 15 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.40 %/yr 0.30 %/yr -0.10 %/yr for SRP-730-BHC-BG
Technology
Cell technology TOPCon HJT TOPCon vs HJT
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 120 132 12 cells apart
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#7,411 vs #716
SRP-730-BHC-BG leads by 6,695 places
Power density
#7,401 vs #800
SRP-730-BHC-BG leads by 6,601 places
Heat behaviour
#6,093 vs #466
SRP-730-BHC-BG leads by 5,627 places
Weight
#11,559 vs #6,396
SRP-730-BHC-BG leads by 5,163 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#8,772 vs #208
SRP-730-BHC-BG leads by 8,564 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-495-BTB-BG
8 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-490-BTB-BG
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-485-BTB-BG
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-480-BTB-BG
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-475-BTB-BG
One difference: module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG vs Seraphim SEG-465-BTB-BG
One difference: module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG or Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG?
According to our database: Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG has higher module efficiency (23.50% vs 21.71%); Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.258%/°C vs -0.300%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG and Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG?
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG has a module efficiency of 21.71%, while Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG is 23.50%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG use vs Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG?
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG uses TOPCon cells; Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG 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 Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG and Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG?
Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG has a 30 years power warranty; Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG 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 Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG and Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG bifacial panels?
Both Seraphim SEG-470-BTB-BG and Seraphim SRP-730-BHC-BG 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 4 Seraphim 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.