These are not the same size of amplifier: Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has roughly 4.3x the power of Cambridge Audio AXA35. That is about 6.3dB, so it is a question of room size and how hard your speakers are to drive, not of one being the better amplifier.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Power | B | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has more power - 150W against 35W into 8 ohms. That is about 6.3dB - a different class of amplifier rather than a bigger version of the same one, and far more than most rooms will ever ask for. |
| Room size | depends | We rate Cambridge Audio AXA35 the better fit for desk or near-field listening, a small room and a mid-size room, and Cambridge Audio Evo 150 for a large room and a very large room. Match the amplifier to the room you actually have, not the one you want. |
| Speaker load rating | B | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 is rated down to 4 ohms against 8, so it is the safer partner for a low-impedance speaker. |
| Built-in DAC | B | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has a DAC on board; the other needs an external one, which is another box, another power lead and another purchase. |
| Streaming | B | Only Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has AirPlay 2, Chromecast and Roon. |
| Analogue inputs | A | Cambridge Audio AXA35 takes more analogue sources - 5 against 2. |
| Use with a TV | depends | Only Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has HDMI ARC, so the television can drive it directly and one remote controls the volume. If the system is for music only, this changes nothing. |
| Room to grow | B | Only Cambridge Audio Evo 150 offers preamp outputs - which decides whether you can add a subwoofer or a power amplifier later without replacing the box. |
| Amplifier class | depends | Cambridge Audio AXA35 is Class A/B and Cambridge Audio Evo 150 is Class D. Class A/B runs warm and is the long-established mainstream choice; Class D runs cool and draws almost nothing at idle. Modern examples of both measure well - judge by the rest of the page. |
| Shelf space | depends | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 takes up about 26% less shelf area (1190cm² against 1598cm²). |
| Price | A | Cambridge Audio AXA35 costs less - $399 against $3,249 at list. |
| Watts per dollar | A | Cambridge Audio AXA35 is the cheaper watt - about $11 per watt against $22. A blunt measure, and it says nothing about how either sounds, but it is the honest one for raw output. |
A Cambridge Audio AXA35 B Cambridge Audio Evo 150
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?
The usual trade-off: Cambridge Audio Evo 150 measures better, Cambridge Audio AXA35 costs about 88% less. With most speakers in most rooms that gap is smaller in practice than it looks here. 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 - Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has the headroom, and headroom is what stops an amplifier hardening up on peaks. At desk distance or in a small room, 35 watts is already more than most people ever use, and the extra 115 watts would be headroom you pay for and never hear - we rate Cambridge Audio Evo 150 poorly for near-field use for exactly that reason. If this sits under a television, Cambridge Audio Evo 150 is the one to buy - HDMI ARC means the TV remote controls the volume and there is no second box in the way.
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.