## 6 Performance Comparison: Proposed Converter vs. Previous High-Boost Converters  
A comparative analysis was undertaken between the proposed converter and prior DC-DC converters. The previous DC-DC converters were simulated in MATLAB Simulink under their specific conditions. In Figure 4(a), it can be observed that the MOSFET device in the proposed converter undergoes lower voltage stress at ultra-high voltage gain in contrast to the power MOSFET in previously studied converters. Additionally, Figure 4(b) illustrates that the voltage on the diode in the proposed converter is notably lower in comparison to the diodes in the converters from previous work. These findings underscore the enhanced performance and stress reduction achieved by the proposed converter in comparison to its counterparts at ultra-high voltage gain applications. As illustrated in Figure 4(c), it is evident that the proposed converter boasts a higher Mdc compared to previous boosting converters. Additionally, the proposed converter demonstrates superior Mdc even at very low duty cycles, specifically when D = 0.25. This implies that the proposed converter incurs lower switching and conduction losses, resulting in higher efficiency. Figure 4(d) shows that the voltage gain over the number of diodes in the proposed converter is higher compared with previous DC-DC converters. In Figure 5(a), it can be observed that the (Mdc/NL) voltage gain over the number of inductors in the proposed converter exhibits higher gain compared to previous converters. In Figure 5(b), it is evident that the voltage gain over the number of switches (Mdc/Nsw) in the proposed converter shows higher gain compared to previous converters. In Figure 5(c), it can be seen that the proposed converter has higher efficiency than previous works when the system operates in DCM at 500 V with a 250 W load at 96%. In Figure 5(d), it can be observed that the proposed converter operates at a lower duty cycle than previous works. The proposed converter is capable of supplying 500 V at 325 W with a duty cycle of around 33%. Table 2 presents a comprehensive comparison between the newly introduced converter and its predecessors. The analysis encompasses various critical factors, including the count of inductors, capacitors, diodes, switching frequency, input current, duty cycle percentage, and MOSFETs employed in both the innovative and traditional boosting converters. Notably, the proposed converter operates at a higher switching frequency, necessitating smaller inductors and capacitors while mitigating parasitic resistance. This design choice contributes to a more compact, lightweight, and cost-effective system. In contrast to its precursors, the proposed converter exhibits superior performance across efficiency, size, and cost-effectiveness metrics. While previous converters achieved the boost from low to high voltage ratios, they did so at the expense of a significantly high duty ratio. In contrast, the new converter adeptly elevates low voltage sources to variable output voltage levels spanning 325 V-500 V, requiring lower duty ratios than its predecessors. Additionally, the proposed converter incorporates fewer power diodes, thereby minimizing losses attributed to forward voltage and internal resistance in comparison to earlier models. Furthermore, the innovative converter boasts a higher voltage gain relative to prior boosting converters, rendering it well suited for applications in renewable energy sources that demand variable and fixed high output voltage with a broader range in duty ratios. Impressively, it achieves an efficiency rating of 96%, underscoring its efficacy in energy conversion. Figure 5: **(a)** Voltage stress across MOSFETs, Vsw/Vg vs. Mdc. **(b)** Voltage stress across diodes, VD/Vg vs. Mdc. **(c)** Comparisons of voltage gain, Mdc vs. D duty cycle. **(d)** Voltage gain Mdc/number of diodes (ND) vs. D.  
Figure 6: (a) Voltage gain Mdc/number of inductors (NL) vs. duty cycle. (b) Voltage gain Mdc/number of switches (NSW) vs. duty cycle.