Siblings in Arcam's A range, so they share a design and a house sound. It comes down to power, features and price.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Power | evenly matched | Effectively the same output - 50W against 50W into 8 ohms is under 1dB, which is not an audible difference in loudness. |
| Grip on hard loads | evenly matched | Both behave much the same into 4 ohms - output increases strongly (75W and 75W). |
| Noise floor | evenly matched | Much the same signal-to-noise ratio (106dB vs 106dB). |
| Built-in DAC | evenly matched | Both have a DAC on board with much the same capability. |
| Analogue inputs | evenly matched | The same number of line-level inputs (3). |
| Room to grow | evenly matched | The same expansion options on both. |
| Price | B | Arcam A5 costs less - $699 against $1,200 at list. |
| Watts per dollar | B | Arcam A5 is the cheaper watt - about $14 per watt against $24. A blunt measure, and it says nothing about how either sounds, but it is the honest one for raw output. |
A Arcam A5+ B Arcam A5
depends neither is better in the abstract - it turns on your room, your system or how you will use them. Only specs published for both amplifiers are judged; anything missing on either side is left out rather than guessed.
Which should you choose?
Arcam A5 has the edge on paper, though not by much. The rows marked "depends" are more likely to decide this than the score is. Think about the whole system: the roughly $501 saved by taking the cheaper one would buy better speakers or a subwoofer, which does more for the sound than the difference between two competent amplifiers.
What a spec sheet cannot show: how either sounds with your speakers, how the controls feel day to day, and what the app is like to live with - which is where most all-in-one amplifiers are actually won or lost. Power figures are the manufacturers' own and are not measured to a common standard, so treat small differences as noise. If you can hear both, that will tell you more than any row above.