Skip to main content
SIL-520 XM vs SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL 17 of 18 identical Swap Change panels

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

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

One difference, none of them an advantage

The largest is cell technology: TOPCon vs N-type. 17 of 18 comparable parameters are identical, with 1 more left out because at least one datasheet does not publish it.

See the one difference
How alike are they
17 of 18 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs not published
01

What actually differs

1 of 18 parameters
Parameter SIL-520 XM SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL Difference
Cell technology TOPCon N-type TOPCon vs N-type
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.
SIL-520 XM
17,260 kWh
SIL-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 SIL-520 XM SIL-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 SIL-520 XM SIL-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 TOPCon N-type TOPCon vs N-type
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 vs Silfab SIL-590 XM+
11 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM vs Silfab SIL-580-XM+-BIFACIAL
10 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM vs Silfab SIL-570 XM+ BIFACIAL
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM vs Silfab SIL-570 XM+
9 differences, the largest is rated power
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM vs Silfab SIL-530 XM
4 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Silfab
Silfab SIL-520 XM vs Silfab SIL-520 QM
3 differences, the largest is cell technology
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Silfab SIL-520 XM 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 and Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM 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 use vs Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM uses TOPCon 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 and Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL?
Silfab SIL-520 XM 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 and Silfab SIL-520 XM BIFACIAL bifacial panels?
Both Silfab SIL-520 XM 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.