Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC
VS
The verdict
430 QD leads on the differences that matter
The largest is module efficiency: 3.40 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
430 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Difference
Module efficiency
22.10 %
18.70 %
3.40 pp more efficient
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.380 %/°C
0.090 %/°C better in heat
Rated power
430 Wp
370 Wp
60 W more power
Power density
220.5 Wp/m²
186.9 Wp/m²
33.7 Wp/m² higher
Annual degradation
0.30 %/yr
0.50 %/yr
0.20 %/yr slower
Weight per kWp
48.8 kg/kWp
58.1 kg/kWp
9.3 kg/kWp lighter
Open-circuit voltage
38.91 V
47.50 V
8.59 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.87 A
9.90 A
3.97 A apart
Cell technology
N-type
PERC
N-type vs PERC
Voltage at max power
33.25 V
38.10 V
4.85 V apart
Current at max power
12.93 A
9.70 A
3.23 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
430 QD
14,497 kWh
370 NT mono PERC
11,968 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,529 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario
430 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Standard test conditions
25 °C
100.0% of rated power
430 W
370 W
Cool, bright day
40 °C
94.3% of rated power
411 W
349 W
Typical summer roof
55 °C
88.6% of rated power
393 W
328 W
Hot roof
70 °C
82.9% of rated power
374 W
307 W
03
Full specification
Parameter
430 QD
370 NT mono PERC
Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power
430 Wp
370 Wp
+60 W for 430 QD
Module efficiency
22.10 %
18.70 %
+3.40 pp for 430 QD
Power density
220.5 Wp/m²
186.9 Wp/m²
+33.7 Wp/m² for 430 QD
Open-circuit voltage
38.91 V
47.50 V
8.59 V apart
Voltage at max power
33.25 V
38.10 V
4.85 V apart
Short-circuit current
13.87 A
9.90 A
3.97 A apart
Current at max power
12.93 A
9.70 A
3.23 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient
-0.290 %/°C
-0.380 %/°C
+0.090 %/°C for 430 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
48.8 kg/kWp
58.1 kg/kWp
-9.3 kg/kWp for 430 QD
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty
25 yrs
25 yrs
Same
Performance warranty
30 yrs
30 yrs
Same
Annual degradation
0.30 %/yr
0.50 %/yr
-0.20 %/yr for 430 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
#6,012
vs
#13,058
430 QD leads by 7,046 places
Power density
#6,191
vs
#13,048
430 QD leads by 6,857 places
Heat behaviour
#2,165
vs
#13,397
430 QD leads by 11,232 places
Weight
#2,492
vs
#11,565
430 QD leads by 9,073 places
Warranty
#21
vs
#21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#7,342
vs
#11,845
430 QD leads by 4,503 places
05
Open the full database
More useful comparisons
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-440 QD
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-430-QD
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-420 QD
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-640 XL
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-630 XL
11 differences, the largest is rated power
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-430 QD vs Silfab SIL-620 XL
8 differences, the largest is rated power
06
Written summary
Checking cache...
07
Questions about this pairing
Which panel is better: Silfab SIL-430 QD or Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
According to our database: Silfab SIL-430 QD has higher module efficiency (22.10% vs 18.70%); Silfab SIL-430 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-430 QD and Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-430 QD has a module efficiency of 22.10%, 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-430 QD use vs Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-430 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-430 QD and Silfab SIL-370 NT mono PERC?
Silfab SIL-430 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.