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 | B | Cambridge CXA81 II has more power - 80W against 50W into 8 ohms. That is about 2dB, so it plays usefully louder before it runs out and has more in hand on peaks. |
| Grip on hard loads | B | Cambridge CXA81 II holds up better into a 4-ohm load: its output increases strongly to 120W, where the other barely increases. That matters with demanding speakers far more than the 8-ohm figure does. |
| Noise floor | B | Cambridge CXA81 II is the quieter design on paper - 105dB against 90dB. Audible mainly with sensitive speakers in a quiet room. |
| Built-in DAC | B | Both decode on board, but only Cambridge CXA81 II handles DSD. |
| Streaming | evenly matched | Only Cambridge CXA81 II has Roon. Neither list is longer in a way that matters - check the one service you actually pay for. |
| Phono stage | depends | NAD C3030 has a built-in phono stage and Cambridge CXA81 II does not. Decisive if you own a turntable, completely irrelevant if you do not - and an outboard phono stage is easy to add later either way. |
| Use with a TV | depends | Only NAD C3030 has HDMI, 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 CXA81 II offers preamp outputs - which decides whether you can add a subwoofer or a power amplifier later without replacing the box. |
| Amplifier class | depends | NAD C3030 is Class D and Cambridge CXA81 II 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 | NAD C3030 takes up about 24% less shelf area (1208cm² against 1595cm²), and it is 32mm shallower, which is the measurement that decides whether a rack door shuts. |
| Price | evenly matched | Priced within a few per cent of each other. |
| Watts per dollar | B | Cambridge CXA81 II is the cheaper watt - about $15 per watt against $24. A blunt measure, and it says nothing about how either sounds, but it is the honest one for raw output. |
A NAD C3030 B Cambridge CXA81 II
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?
Cambridge CXA81 II has the edge on paper, though not by much. The rows marked "depends" are more likely to decide this than the score is. If your speakers are a difficult load - 4 ohms nominal, big woofers, or a sensitivity in the low 80s - Cambridge CXA81 II 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 - Cambridge CXA81 II 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 30 watts would be headroom you pay for and never hear - we rate Cambridge CXA81 II 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.