Skip to main content
AAA.05-720 vs 725.05 16 of 19 identical Swap Change panels

Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05

Vikram Solar
HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720
720 Wp 23.18 % N-type Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
VS
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05
Vikram Solar
HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05
725 Wp 23.34 % N-type Bifacial
Open panel page Datasheet PDF
The verdict

725.05 leads on the differences that matter

The largest is weight: 2.0 kg lighter. 16 of 19 comparable parameters are identical.

See all 3 differences
How alike are they
16 of 19 comparable
parameters are identical
identical differs
01

What actually differs

3 of 19 parameters
Parameter AAA.05-720 725.05 Difference
Weight 39.5 kg 37.5 kg 2.0 kg lighter
Weight per kWp 54.9 kg/kWp 51.7 kg/kWp 3.1 kg/kWp lighter
Dimensions 2384x1303x35 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 2384x1303x35 mm vs 2384x1303x33 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.
AAA.05-720
24,157 kWh
725.05
24,325 kWh
Lifetime gap
168 kWh
Output when it is hot
Rated power carried across the range a module actually sees
Scenario AAA.05-720 725.05
Standard test conditions 25 °C 100.0% of rated power 720 W 725 W
Cool, bright day 40 °C 95.8% of rated power 690 W 695 W
Typical summer roof 55 °C 91.6% of rated power 660 W 664 W
Hot roof 70 °C 87.4% of rated power 629 W 634 W
03

Full specification

Parameter AAA.05-720 725.05 Difference
Power and efficiency
Rated power 720 Wp 725 Wp Effectively the same
Module efficiency 23.18 % 23.34 % Effectively the same
Power density 231.8 Wp/m² 233.4 Wp/m² Effectively the same
Open-circuit voltage 49.40 V 49.60 V Effectively the same
Voltage at max power 41.20 V 41.40 V Effectively the same
Short-circuit current 18.52 A 18.56 A Effectively the same
Current at max power 17.49 A 17.52 A Effectively the same
Temperature
Temperature coefficient -0.280 %/°C -0.280 %/°C Same
Mechanical
Dimensions 2384x1303x35 mm 2384x1303x33 mm 2384x1303x35 mm vs 2384x1303x33 mm
Module area 3.106 m² 3.106 m² Same
Weight 39.5 kg 37.5 kg -2.0 kg for 725.05
Weight per kWp 54.9 kg/kWp 51.7 kg/kWp -3.1 kg/kWp for 725.05
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 #981
725.05 leads by 487 places
Power density
#1,390 vs #974
725.05 leads by 416 places
Heat behaviour
#1,347 vs #1,347
Tied - the same position in the database
Weight
#9,332 vs #5,114
725.05 leads by 4,218 places
Warranty
#21 vs #21
Tied - the same position in the database
Overall
#574 vs #402
725.05 leads by 172 places
05

More useful comparisons

Open the full database
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.730.05
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.720.05
3 differences, the largest is weight
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.715.05
3 differences, the largest is weight
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-715
The same specification on paper
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.710.05
6 differences, the largest is module efficiency
Same series, other bin
Vikram Solar
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-710
3 differences, the largest is module efficiency
06

Written summary

07

Questions about this pairing

Which panel is better: Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 or Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05?
According to our database: Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 has higher module efficiency (23.34% 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.AAA.05-720 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 has a module efficiency of 23.18%, while Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 is 23.34%. Higher efficiency means more electricity from the same roof area - useful when space is limited.
What cell technology does Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 use vs Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 uses N-type cells; Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 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.AAA.05-720 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05?
Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 has a 30 years power warranty; Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 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.AAA.05-720 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 bifacial panels?
Both Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.AAA.05-720 and Vikram Solar HYPERSOL VSMDH.66.725.05 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.