Skip to main content
GSD8K66H-735WT vs GK-4-78HGBD-775M 6 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M

Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT
Sharp
GSD8K66H-735WT
735 Wp 23.66 % HJT Bifacial
VS
Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Gokin
GK-4-78HGBD-775M
775 Wp 24.10 % Back Contact Bifacial
The verdict

GK-4-78HGBD-775M leads on the differences that matter

The largest is rated power: 40 W more power. 6 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 13 differences
How alike are they
6 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

13 of 19 parameters
Parameter GSD8K66H-735WT GK-4-78HGBD-775M Difference
Rated power 735 Wp 775 Wp 40 W more power
Product warranty 25 yrs 15 yrs 10 yrs longer
Module efficiency 23.66 % 24.10 % 0.44 pp more efficient
Open-circuit voltage 51.50 V 58.82 V 7.32 V apart
Module area 3.106 m² 3.212 m² 0.106 m² apart
Power density 236.6 Wp/m² 241.3 Wp/m² 4.7 Wp/m² higher
Cell technology HJT Back Contact HJT vs Back Contact
Weight per kWp 53.1 kg/kWp 49.9 kg/kWp 3.1 kg/kWp lighter
Short-circuit current 17.72 A 16.71 A 1.01 A apart
Voltage at max power 43.60 V 48.87 V 5.27 V apart
Cell count 132 156 24 cells apart
Current at max power 16.87 A 15.86 A 1.01 A apart
Dimensions 2384x1303x35 mm 2465x1303x33 mm 2384x1303x35 mm vs 2465x1303x33 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
Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.260 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
GSD8K66H-735WT
24,853 kWh
GK-4-78HGBD-775M
26,205 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,352 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario GSD8K66H-735WT GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 735 W 775 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 96.1% of rated power 706 W 745 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 92.2% of rated power 678 W 715 W
Hot roof 70 °C 88.3% of rated power 649 W 684 W
03

Full specification

Parameter GSD8K66H-735WT GK-4-78HGBD-775M Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 735 Wp 775 Wp +40 W for GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Module efficiency 23.66 % 24.10 % +0.44 pp for GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Power density 236.6 Wp/m² 241.3 Wp/m² +4.7 Wp/m² for GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Open-circuit voltage 51.50 V 58.82 V 7.32 V apart
Voltage at max power 43.60 V 48.87 V 5.27 V apart
Short-circuit current 17.72 A 16.71 A 1.01 A apart
Current at max power 16.87 A 15.86 A 1.01 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.260 %/°C -0.260 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x35 mm 2465x1303x33 mm 2384x1303x35 mm vs 2465x1303x33 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 3.212 m² 0.106 m² apart
Weight 39.0 kg 38.7 kg Effectively the same
Weight per kWp 53.1 kg/kWp 49.9 kg/kWp -3.1 kg/kWp for GK-4-78HGBD-775M
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 25 yrs 15 yrs +10 yrs for GSD8K66H-735WT
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.35 %/yr 0.35 %/yr Same
Technology
Cell technology HJT Back Contact HJT vs Back Contact
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 156 24 cells apart
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#602 vs #219
GK-4-78HGBD-775M leads by 383 places
Power density
#582 vs #227
GK-4-78HGBD-775M leads by 355 places
Heat behaviour
#511 vs #511
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#6,818 vs #3,297
GK-4-78HGBD-775M leads by 3,521 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#21 vs #29
GSD8K66H-735WT leads by 8 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-740WT
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-730WT
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-725WT
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-720WT
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-715WT
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Sharp
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT vs Sharp GSD8K66H-710WT
5 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT or Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M?
According to our database: Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M has higher module efficiency (24.10% vs 23.66%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT and Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M?
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT has a module efficiency of 23.66%, while Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M is 24.10%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT use vs Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M?
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT uses HJT cells; Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M uses Back Contact. 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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT and Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M?
Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT has a 30 years power warranty; Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M 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 Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT and Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M bifacial panels?
Both Sharp GSD8K66H-735WT and Gokin GK-4-78HGBD-775M 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.
Compare Sharp and Gokin as manufacturers Portfolio, efficiency, cell technologies and warranty terms

Shop prices: See 6 Sharp offers · See 7 Gokin 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.