Skip to main content
520 XM BIFACIAL vs 520-XM-BIFACIAL 18 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL

Silfab
SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL
520 Wp 21.90 % N-type Bifacial Incomplete
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Silfab
SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL
520 Wp 21.90 % N-type Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

Identical on every published parameter

All 18 comparable parameters agree, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it. Two records this alike are usually one panel sold under two names, or two bins of the same production line - decide on price and on who you would rather buy from.

How alike are they
18 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

0 of 18 parameters

Every comparable parameter agrees. The full specification is below.

02

What it means on a roof

Thirty years of production
Declared first-year losses, with 0.40% a year afterwards assumed for both panels, at 1,200 kWh/kWp a year
Same temp coeff. for both panels (-0.290 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
520 XM BIFACIAL
17,260 kWh
520-XM-BIFACIAL
17,260 kWh
Lifetime gap
No difference
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario 520 XM BIFACIAL 520-XM-BIFACIAL
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 520 W 520 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.7% of rated power 497 W 497 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.3% of rated power 475 W 475 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.0% of rated power 452 W 452 W
03

Full specification

Parameter 520 XM BIFACIAL 520-XM-BIFACIAL Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 520 Wp 520 Wp Same
Module efficiency 21.90 % 21.90 % Same
Power density 218.8 Wp/m² 218.8 Wp/m² Same
Open-circuit voltage 47.52 V 47.52 V Same
Voltage at max power 40.48 V 40.48 V Same
Short-circuit current 13.65 A 13.65 A Same
Current at max power 12.85 A 12.85 A Same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.290 %/°C -0.290 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2098x1133x35 mm 2098x1133x35 mm Same
Module area 2.377 m² 2.377 m² Same
Weight 26.2 kg 26.2 kg Same
Weight per kWp 50.4 kg/kWp 50.4 kg/kWp Same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 25 yrs 25 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation - 0.30 %/yr Not published by Silfab
Technology
Cell technology N-type N-type Same
Cell type Monocrystalline Monocrystalline Same
Cell count 132 132 Same
Bifacial Yes Yes Same
04

Against the whole database

14,005 panels
Efficiency
#6,783 vs #6,783
Tied - the same position in the database
Power density
#6,837 vs #6,837
Tied - the same position in the database
Heat behaviour
#2,165 vs #2,165
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#3,761 vs #3,761
Tied - the same position in the database
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#4,485 vs #4,485
Tied - the same position in the database
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-580-XM+-BIFACIAL
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-570 XM+ BIFACIAL
8 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-540-XM-BIFACIAL
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-640 XL
10 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-630 XL
10 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same manufacturer
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL vs Silfab SIL-620 XL
10 differences, the largest is rated power
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL or Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL?
According to our database: both panels are closely matched on key specs - the decision often comes down to price and local availability. See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL and Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL has a module efficiency of 21.90%, while Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL is 21.90%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL use vs Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL uses N-type cells; Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL uses N-type. 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-520 XM BIFACIAL and Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL has a 30 years power warranty; Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL 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 Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL and Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL bifacial panels?
Both Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL and Silfab SIL-520-XM-BIFACIAL 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 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.