Different price classes - Audiolab 6000A costs roughly 1.6x what MISSION 778X does. Expect it to lead on paper; the question is whether you will hear the difference through the speakers you own.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Power | evenly matched | Effectively the same output - 45W 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 modestly (65W and 75W). |
| Built-in DAC | A | Both decode on board. MISSION 778X goes higher - 384kHz against 192kHz. Very few recordings exist above 192kHz, so treat this as headroom, not as sound quality. |
| Price | A | MISSION 778X costs less - $549 against $899 at list. |
| Watts per dollar | A | MISSION 778X is the cheaper watt - about $12 per watt against $18. A blunt measure, and it says nothing about how either sounds, but it is the honest one for raw output. |
A MISSION 778X B Audiolab 6000A
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?
MISSION 778X is the easier recommendation: it leads on most of the measured areas and costs less. Take Audiolab 6000A if one of the "depends" rows above describes your system. Think about the whole system: the roughly $350 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.