Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC
VS
The verdict
420 QD leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 2.80 pp more efficient. 5 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.
See all 14 differencesHow alike are they
5
of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
parameters are identical
identical
differs
01
14 of 19 parameters
What actually differs
Parameter
420 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Difference
Module efficiency
21.50 %
18.70 %
2.80 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.380 %/°C
0.090 %/°C better in heat
Rated power
420 Wp
370 Wp
50 W more power
Power density
215.4 Wp/m²
186.9 Wp/m²
28.5 Wp/m² higher
Weight per kWp
50.0 kg/kWp
58.1 kg/kWp
8.1 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage
38.84 V
47.50 V
8.66 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.50 A
9.90 A
3.60 A apart
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.50 %/yr
0.10 %/yr slower
Cell technology
N-type
PERC
N-type vs PERC
Voltage at max power
33.08 V
38.10 V
5.02 V apart
Current at max power
12.70 A
9.70 A
3.00 A apart
Cell count
108
72
36 cells apart
Module area
1.950 m²
1.980 m²
0.030 m² apart
Dimensions
1721x1133x35 mm
1992x994x38 mm
1721x1133x35 mm vs 1992x994x38 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
420 QD
13,941 kWh
370 NT mono PERC
11,968 kWh
Lifetime gap
1,973 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
420 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
420 W
370 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
94.3% of rated power
402 W
349 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
88.6% of rated power
383 W
328 W
Hot roof
70 °C
82.9% of rated power
365 W
307 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
420 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
420 Wp
370 Wp
+50 W for 420 QD
Module efficiency
21.50 %
18.70 %
+2.80 pp for 420 QD
Power density
215.4 Wp/m²
186.9 Wp/m²
+28.5 Wp/m² for 420 QD
Open-circuit voltage
38.84 V
47.50 V
8.66 V apart
Voltage at max power
33.08 V
38.10 V
5.02 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.50 A
9.90 A
3.60 A apart
Current at max power
12.70 A
9.70 A
3.00 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.380 %/°C
+0.090 %/°C for 420 QD
Mechanical
Dimensions
1721x1133x35 mm
1992x994x38 mm
1721x1133x35 mm vs 1992x994x38 mm
Module area
1.950 m²
1.980 m²
0.030 m² apart
Weight
21.0 kg
21.5 kg
Effectively the same
Weight per kWp
50.0 kg/kWp
58.1 kg/kWp
-8.1 kg/kWp for 420 QD
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
25 yrs
25 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.40 %/yr
0.50 %/yr
-0.10 %/yr for 420 QD
Technology
Cell technology
N-type
PERC
N-type vs PERC
Cell type
Monocrystalline
Monocrystalline
Same
Cell count
108
72
36 cells apart
Bifacial
No
No
Same
04
14,005 panels
Against the whole database
Efficiency
#7,958
vs
#13,058
420 QD leads by 5,100 places
Power density
#7,783
vs
#13,048
420 QD leads by 5,265 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165
vs
#13,397
420 QD leads by 11,232 places
Weight
#3,317
vs
#11,565
420 QD leads by 8,248 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#8,547
vs
#11,845
420 QD leads by 3,298 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-440 QD
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-430 QD
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-430-QD
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-640 XL
12 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-630 XL
12 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-420 QD vs Silfab SIL-620 XL
12 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Silfab SIL-420 QD or Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
According to our database: Silfab SIL-420 QD has higher module efficiency (21.50% vs 18.70%); Silfab SIL-420 QD tolerates heat better (temp coeff -0.290%/°C vs -0.380%/°C). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Silfab SIL-420 QD and Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-420 QD has a module efficiency of 21.50%, while Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC is 18.70%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Silfab SIL-420 QD use vs Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-420 QD uses N-type cells; Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC uses PERC. 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 Silfab SIL-420 QD and Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-420 QD has a 30 years power warranty; Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC 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.
Shop prices: See 2 Silfab 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.