Specialist & Local
Prime QD
Silfab
67/ 100
Moderate evidence coverage · 54%
Evidence checked 2026-07-15
15+ Yrs Field-Proven
Full scorecard Score profile
| Measure | Prime QD | Glass |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture & Design | ||
| Efficiency & Yield | ||
| Durability (verified) | ||
| Performance & Degradation | ||
| Guarantee & Backbone | ||
| Sustainability |
Architecture & Design
- Prime QD
72 / 100 - Glass
83 / 100
Efficiency & Yield
- Prime QD
56 / 100 - Glass
62 / 100
Durability (verified)
- Prime QD
55 / 100 - Glass
59 / 100
Performance & Degradation
- Prime QD
78 / 100 - Glass
89 / 100
Guarantee & Backbone
- Prime QD
83 / 100 - Glass
62 / 100
Sustainability
- Prime QD
66 / 100 - Glass
72 / 100
Key specifications
| Measure | Prime QD | Glass |
|---|---|---|
| Published rated power range | 420–440 W | 370–390 W |
| Scored benchmark | 440 W | 390 W |
| Power | 440 W | 390 W |
| Efficiency | 22.6 % | 21.8 % |
| Cell | TOPCon | Heterojunction |
| Temp coeff | -0.29 %/°C | -0.26 %/°C |
Published rated power range
- Prime QD
- 420–440 W
- Glass
- 370–390 W
Scored benchmark
- Prime QD
- 440 W
- Glass
- 390 W
Power
- Prime QD
- 440 W
- Glass
- 390 W
Efficiency
- Prime QD
- 22.6 %
- Glass
- 21.8 %
Cell
- Prime QD
- TOPCon
- Glass
- Heterojunction
Temp coeff
- Prime QD
- -0.29 %/°C
- Glass
- -0.26 %/°C
Where the comparison separates
OverallGlass leads the global score by 4 points.
Strongest dimensionsPrime QD: Guarantee & Backbone · Glass: Performance & Degradation
Largest differencePrime QD has the largest pillar edge in Guarantee & Backbone (21 points).
Evidence coveragePrime QD: moderate evidence coverage (54%) · Glass: limited evidence coverage (29%)
A score lead is only meaningful inside this shared class or tier. Weigh it against the specification and evidence rows above before deciding.
Both products are scored in the Specialist & Local class, on the same rubric weighting. Scores are not comparable across classes or tiers. Full methodology.