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. |
| 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 you already own a DAC or a streamer, the built-in one is money you are paying twice for, and Cambridge Audio AXA35 becomes the more rational buy.
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.