These are not the same size of amplifier: NAD C 389 has roughly 2.2x the power of Technics SA-C600. That is about 3.4dB, 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 | NAD C 389 has more power - 130W against 60W into 8 ohms. That is about 3.4dB, so it plays usefully louder before it runs out and has more in hand on peaks. |
| Room size | depends | We rate Technics SA-C600 the better fit for desk or near-field listening and a small room, and NAD C 389 for a mid-size room, a large room and a very large room. Match the amplifier to the room you actually have, not the one you want. |
| Built-in DAC | evenly matched | Both have a DAC on board with much the same capability. |
| Streaming | A | Only Technics SA-C600 has AirPlay 2 and Chromecast. |
| Analogue inputs | B | NAD C 389 takes more analogue sources - 3 against 2. |
| Use with a TV | depends | Only NAD C 389 has HDMI eARC, 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 | evenly matched | The same expansion options on both. |
| Built-in sources | depends | Technics SA-C600 has a CD player built in. That is one less box if you still play discs or listen to radio, and dead weight if you do not. |
| Shelf space | depends | Technics SA-C600 takes up about 32% less shelf area (1161cm² against 1705cm²), and it is 51mm shallower, which is the measurement that decides whether a rack door shuts. |
| Price | A | Technics SA-C600 costs less - $1,300 against $1,999 at list. |
| Watts per dollar | B | NAD C 389 is the cheaper watt - about $15 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 Technics SA-C600 B NAD C 389
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: NAD C 389 measures better, Technics SA-C600 costs about 35% 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 - NAD C 389 has the headroom, and headroom is what stops an amplifier hardening up on peaks. At desk distance or in a small room, 60 watts is already more than most people ever use, and the extra 70 watts would be headroom you pay for and never hear - we rate NAD C 389 poorly for near-field use for exactly that reason. If this sits under a television, NAD C 389 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.