1. Core Power and Current Capability: The most fundamental difference lies in the rated power (90W vs. 130W) and the corresponding maximum output current (6A vs. 8.66A). The 130W model not only provides up to 44% additional power headroom for the original design—improving system reliability and reducing module operating temperature—but also offers the potential to drive larger loads or accommodate future upgrades. The $2 price differential for a 40W increase in power margin represents excellent cost-effectiveness. 2. Efficiency and Thermal Design: The nominal efficiency of the 130W model (88%) is slightly lower than that of the 90W model (89%). This typically indicates that their peak efficiency points may correspond to different load ranges, and achieving higher power density (more power in the same volume) likely involves a slight efficiency trade-off. In practical applications, if the system operates for extended periods within the medium-to-high load range of the original 90W model (e.g., 4–6A), replacing it with the 130W model may place the module in a relatively light-load state. Under such conditions, actual efficiency may not be optimized and could even be marginally lower than that of the original model at the same operating point. Thermal performance should therefore be evaluated in conjunction with the specific load profile. 3. Power Density and Cooling Requirements: Within identical form factors and mounting configurations, the 130W model exhibits significantly higher power density. Although its specified operating temperature range is the same, under full-load or high-ambient conditions, its practical demands on thermal management—such as thermal contact between the baseplate and chassis, as well as airflow—become more stringent. If the original system’s thermal design is already near the limits for the 90W model, direct substitution may lead to thermal protection triggering or reduced lifespan during high-load operation. Summary: The substitution is fully feasible both electrically and mechanically and offers a clear advantage in terms of power headroom. When making a decision, the actual operating load point should be carefully evaluated to anticipate changes in efficiency and temperature rise. Additionally, verify that the existing thermal design can accommodate the potentially greater demands of the higher-power-density module.