One is a streaming all-in-one and the other is an amplifier. Judge them on how many boxes you want and what you already own, not on the spec sheet alone.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Power | A | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has more power - 150W against 100W into 8 ohms. That is about 1.8dB, which is a small step in loudness but real headroom on peaks. |
| Room size | depends | We rate Cambridge Audio Evo 150 the better fit for a very large room, and Audiolab 9000A for desk or near-field listening, a small room and a mid-size room. Match the amplifier to the room you actually have, not the one you want. |
| Grip on hard loads | evenly matched | Both behave much the same into 4 ohms - output increases strongly (250W and 160W). |
| Built-in DAC | A | Both decode on board. Cambridge Audio Evo 150 goes higher - 384kHz against 192kHz. Very few recordings exist above 192kHz, so treat this as headroom, not as sound quality. |
| Streaming | A | Only Cambridge Audio Evo 150 has AirPlay 2, Chromecast and Roon. |
| Analogue inputs | B | Audiolab 9000A takes more analogue sources - 3 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 Audiolab 9000A 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 | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 is Class D and Audiolab 9000A is Class A/B. Class D runs cool and draws almost nothing at idle; Class A/B runs warm and is the long-established mainstream choice. Modern examples of both measure well - judge by the rest of the page. |
| Shelf space | depends | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 takes up about 22% less shelf area (1190cm² against 1518cm²), and it is 30mm shallower, which is the measurement that decides whether a rack door shuts. |
| Price | B | Audiolab 9000A costs less - $2,999 against $3,249 at list. |
| Watts per dollar | A | Cambridge Audio Evo 150 is the cheaper watt - about $22 per watt against $30. A blunt measure, and it says nothing about how either sounds, but it is the honest one for raw output. |
A Cambridge Audio Evo 150 B Audiolab 9000A
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, Audiolab 9000A costs about 8% less. With most speakers in most rooms that gap is smaller in practice than it looks here. 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.