Skip to main content
720.05 vs 640.05 11 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05

Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05
Vikram Solar
HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05
720 Wp 23.18 % N-type Bifacial
VS
Vikram Solar
HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05
640 Wp 23.69 % N-type Bifacial
The verdict

640.05 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is rated power: 80 W more power. 11 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 8 differences
How alike are they
11 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

8 of 19 parameters
Parameter 720.05 640.05 Difference
Rated power 720 Wp 640 Wp 80 W more power
Module efficiency 23.18 % 23.69 % 0.51 pp more efficient
Weight 37.5 kg 33.4 kg 4.1 kg lighter
Short-circuit current 18.52 A 16.16 A 2.36 A apart
Module area 3.106 m² 2.701 m² 0.405 m² apart
Power density 231.8 Wp/m² 236.9 Wp/m² 5.1 Wp/m² higher
Current at max power 17.49 A 15.25 A 2.24 A apart
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 2382x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 2382x1134x30 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 (-0.280 %/°C), so a warmer roof scales both curves by the same factor: the totals fall together and neither panel gains on the other.
720.05
24,157 kWh
640.05
21,473 kWh
Lifetime gap
2,684 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario 720.05 640.05
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 720 W 640 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.8% of rated power 690 W 613 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.6% of rated power 660 W 586 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.4% of rated power 629 W 559 W
03

Full specification

Parameter 720.05 640.05 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 720 Wp 640 Wp +80 W for 720.05
Module efficiency 23.18 % 23.69 % +0.51 pp for 640.05
Power density 231.8 Wp/m² 236.9 Wp/m² +5.1 Wp/m² for 640.05
Open-circuit voltage 49.40 V 49.90 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 41.20 V 42.00 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 18.52 A 16.16 A 2.36 A apart
Current at max power 17.49 A 15.25 A 2.24 A apart
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.280 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x33 mm 2382x1134x30 mm 2384x1303x33 mm vs 2382x1134x30 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 2.701 m² 0.405 m² apart
Weight 37.5 kg 33.4 kg -4.1 kg for 640.05
Weight per kWp 52.1 kg/kWp 52.2 kg/kWp Effectively the same
Warranty and degradation
Product warranty 12 yrs 12 yrs Same
Performance warranty 30 yrs 30 yrs Same
Annual degradation 0.40 %/yr 0.40 %/yr Same
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

14,129 panels
Efficiency
#1,468 vs #612
640.05 leads by 856 places
Power density
#1,390 vs #553
640.05 leads by 837 places
Heat behaviour
#1,347 vs #1,347
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#5,553 vs #5,707
720.05 leads by 154 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#543 vs #1,555
720.05 leads by 1,012 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.730.05
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.715.05
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.710.05
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.705.05
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.700.05
10 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

Checking cache...
07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 or Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05?
According to our database: Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 has higher module efficiency (23.69% vs 23.18%). See the full spec comparison and 30-year energy simulation above for a complete picture.
What is the efficiency of Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 has a module efficiency of 23.18%, while Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 is 23.69%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 use vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 uses N-type cells; Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 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 Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 has a 30 years power warranty; Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 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 Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 bifacial panels?
Both Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.640.05 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.

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.