Skip to main content

GCL vs Jinko Solar - solar panel manufacturer comparison

GCL
China Founded 1990 Tier 1
Read the GCL review
VS
Jinko Solar
China Founded 2006 Tier 1
Read the Jinko Solar review
At a glance

Jinko Solar has the broader catalog (637 vs 232 models). Jinko Solar leads on peak efficiency at 24.80%. GCL leans bifacial (65% of lineup).

Both catalogues are read from the manufacturers' own datasheets. A brand is not scored against the market here, only against the other brand on this page.

Panel models
232 637
Highest power
740 Wp 735 Wp
Best efficiency
24.5% 24.8%
Average efficiency
22.0% 22.2%
Bifacial share
65% 36%
Average warranty
28 yrs 29 yrs
01

The two companies

Company facts, not datasheet figures
GCL

GCL is a global company focusing on green energy and high-efficiency photovoltaic materials. They are known for their innovation in polysilicon and wafer technologies, with a focus on low-carbon solutions. GCL is committed to building a low-carbon PV value chain and advancing global clean energy transformation.

Founded
1990
Headquarters
Suzhou/Hong Kong, China
Annual capacity
30+ GW/year
Employees
6000+
Tier 1 bankable
Yes
Jinko Solar

JinkoSolar is a global leader in the solar industry, manufacturing and distributing solar products and solutions to a diversified international customer base. They have a vertically integrated solar product value chain. The company is committed to providing clean, efficient, and sustainable energy solutions worldwide.

Founded
2006
Headquarters
Shanghai, China
Annual capacity
130.0 GW/year
Employees
33,830
Listed
NYSE: JKS
Tier 1 bankable
Yes
02

Catalogue against catalogue

Averages over every model in the database
Metric GCL Jinko Solar
Catalog & Power
Panel Models 232 637+405
Max Power 740 W+5 W 735 W
Avg Power 558 W+36 W 523 W
Efficiency
Max Efficiency 24.50% 24.80%+0.30 pp
Avg Efficiency 22.03% 22.18%+0.15 pp
Reliability & Warranty
Avg Temp Coefficient -0.320%/°C -0.304%/°C+0.016
Bifacial Share 151 (65%)+29 pp 231 (36%)
Avg Warranty 28.4 yrs 28.7 yrs+0.3 yr

An average over a catalogue describes the range a manufacturer publishes, not the module you would buy. A brand with two flagship panels and eighty older ones averages worse than one that has retired its back catalogue.

03

What each of them builds

Cell technology across the market
Efficiency spread
Share of each catalogue in every efficiency band

Jinko Solar skews to higher efficiency: 29% of lineup is 23%+

Power spread
Share of each catalogue in every power band

GCL offers more 600W+ panels (44% of lineup)

GCL cell technology
Share of their models by cell architecture

Dominant cell tech: <strong>TOPCon</strong> (47%)

Jinko Solar cell technology
Share of their models by cell architecture

Dominant cell tech: <strong>TOPCon</strong> (41%)

04

The flagships

Highest-power models from each brand
05

Written summary

Checking cache...

GCL, founded in 1990 and headquartered in China, is one of the solar industry's longer-established module manufacturers, with a stated production capacity exceeding 30 GW and a workforce of over 6,000 employees. Listed on both the Hong Kong Stock Exchange and the Shenzhen Stock Exchange, GCL holds Tier 1 bankable status and offers a focused catalog of 205 panel models. Jinko Solar, founded in 2006, has grown into the world's leading solar module supplier by shipment volume, with a production capacity of 130 GW, more than 33,800 employees, and a listing on the NYSE. Both are Tier 1 bankable, but Jinko Solar's scale - more than four times GCL's production capacity - combined with its position as a consistent global shipment leader gives it a clear advantage in supply security, logistical reach, and leverage in large-volume procurement negotiations.

Technologically, GCL's portfolio is led by PERC cells (36.1% of models), while Jinko Solar has moved further into next-generation n-type territory, with TOPCon technology representing 39.4% of its 545-model lineup. Jinko's maximum module efficiency reaches 24.8% versus GCL's 24.06%, and its average temperature coefficient of -0.308%/°C outperforms GCL's -0.324%/°C, translating to better real-world output in warm operating conditions. A notable contrast lies in bifacial adoption: GCL's portfolio is 60.5% bifacial compared to 31.9% for Jinko, making GCL a strong fit for ground-mount utility-scale and commercial C&I projects where rear-side energy gain is a design priority. GCL also carries a higher average panel wattage of 551.8 Wp versus Jinko's 511.1 Wp, indicating a product mix weighted toward larger-format modules. Jinko, backed by 11 consecutive PVEL Top Performer recognitions and a broad catalog, is well-suited to residential rooftop installs, utility-scale ground-mount projects, and international commercial tenders that require deep supply chain reliability.

For international buyers choosing between the two, Jinko Solar is the lower-risk option for high-volume or diversified procurement - its greater production capacity, NYSE-listed transparency, wider technology range, and superior temperature coefficient make it versatile across project types and geographies. GCL presents a compelling case specifically for bifacial ground-mount projects, where its high bifacial share and larger average module size deliver a straightforward efficiency-per-area advantage. Both manufacturers carry comparable warranty terms of approximately 28 years and hold Tier 1 ratings, so the final decision hinges on technology preference, project typology, and the weight a buyer places on supplier scale and track record.

Generated by Claude Sonnet · 2026-05-08

06

Other brand comparisons

Build your own
Manufacturers
GCL A.B. Energy
Manufacturers
AE Solar Jinko Solar
Manufacturers
GCL AEET
Manufacturers
AIKO Jinko Solar
Manufacturers
GCL AKCOME
Manufacturers
ARTsolar Jinko Solar
Something missing from a catalogue? Both lists are built from the datasheets in the database. If a model is absent, it has not been ingested yet.

Shop prices: See 6 GCL offers · See 171 Jinko Solar offers

Comparisons are computed from manufacturer datasheets held in the ComparePV database and may not reflect a brand's complete current lineup. Nothing on this page is paid placement.