No single best amplifier here. What decides it is what you have to drive, what you need to plug in, and how much of the system you want in one box.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Power | B | Arcam SA20 has more power - 90W against 50W into 8 ohms. That is about 2.6dB, so it plays usefully louder before it runs out and has more in hand on peaks. |
| Room size | depends | We rate Audiolab 6000A MKII the better fit for desk or near-field listening and a small room, and Arcam SA20 for a mid-size room, a large room and a very large room. Match the amplifier to the room you actually have, not the one you want. |
| Grip on hard loads | B | Arcam SA20 holds up better into a 4-ohm load: its output increases strongly to 150W, where the other increases strongly. That matters with demanding speakers far more than the 8-ohm figure does. |
| Noise floor | A | Audiolab 6000A MKII is the quieter design on paper - 110dB against 106dB. Audible mainly with sensitive speakers in a quiet room. |
| Built-in DAC | evenly matched | Both have a DAC on board with much the same capability. |
| Analogue inputs | B | Arcam SA20 takes more analogue sources - 4 against 3. |
| Room to grow | A | Only Audiolab 6000A MKII offers a pre-out/main-in loop - which decides whether you can add a subwoofer or a power amplifier later without replacing the box. |
| Amplifier class | depends | Audiolab 6000A MKII is Class A/B and Arcam SA20 is Class G. Class A/B runs warm and is the long-established mainstream choice; Class G/H switches its supply rails to cut the heat a Class A/B design wastes. Modern examples of both measure well - judge by the rest of the page. |
| Shelf space | depends | Audiolab 6000A MKII takes up about 16% less shelf area (1328cm² against 1580cm²), and it is 65mm shallower, which is the measurement that decides whether a rack door shuts. |
| Price | A | Audiolab 6000A MKII costs less - $1,099 against $1,650 at list. |
A Audiolab 6000A MKII B Arcam SA20
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 SA20 is ahead, but on only 1 of the measured areas, and it costs about 50% more. That is a lot of money for a narrow margin - Audiolab 6000A MKII is the sensible buy unless a specific feature above decides it for you. If your speakers are a difficult load - 4 ohms nominal, big woofers, or a sensitivity in the low 80s - Arcam SA20 is the safer partner, because how an amplifier behaves when the impedance drops matters more than its 8-ohm rating. Start with the room. In a large or open-plan room, or with speakers that are hard to drive - low sensitivity, or an impedance that dips - Arcam SA20 has the headroom, and headroom is what stops an amplifier hardening up on peaks. At desk distance or in a small room, 50 watts is already more than most people ever use, and the extra 40 watts would be headroom you pay for and never hear - we rate Arcam SA20 poorly for near-field use for exactly that reason.
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.