Both are desktop DAC/amps, $2399 against $2999. This page puts them side by side on the only three things a maker can be held to — power, output impedance and noise — and then asks the question that actually matters: which headphones do they treat differently?
On raw power they are level: each reaches 100 dB on 567 of the 567 non-electrostatic models here.
| Specification | Benchmark DAC3 HGC | Matrix element M2 |
|---|---|---|
| Power into 32Ω | 1.2 W | 1.2 W |
| Power into 150Ω | 250 mW | 380 mW |
| Power into 300Ω | 125 mW | 280 mW |
| Power into 600Ω | 62 mW | 140 mW |
| Output impedance | 0.11 Ω | 11 Ω |
| Output noise | not published | not published |
| Price | $2399 | $2999 |
| Headphones it reaches 100 dB on out of 567 | 567 | 567 |
A figure marked not published is missing from the maker’s own material, which is not the same as being good or bad. Where one of these two publishes a number and the other does not, the comparison on that axis cannot be made at all — and saying so is more useful than guessing.
| Load | Benchmark DAC3 HGC | Matrix element M2 |
|---|---|---|
| 32 Ω | Derived | Derived |
| 150 Ω | Derived | Derived |
| 300 Ω | Derived | Published |
| 600 Ω | Derived | Published |
Only one of these two columns starts from a power rating. Matrix element M2 publishes one at 300 Ω and at 600 Ω; Benchmark DAC3 HGC publishes none at any of these four loads, so its column is worked out from power it published at other loads. Both are arithmetic on a maker’s own figures rather than guesses, and the method used for the Benchmark DAC3 HGC understates rather than flatters — but at 300 Ω and at 600 Ω are the only loads here at which its maker can be held to a figure.
What each of these labels means, and why a derived figure is still worth printing, is set out in how this data was built.
On power they are interchangeable across this whole database: there is no headphone here that one reaches 100 dB on and the other does not.
520 headphones are left alone by the Benchmark DAC3 HGC under the one-eighth rule but coloured by the Matrix element M2 (64 Audio Aspire 1, 64 Audio Fourte, 64 Audio Nio, 517 more).
567 of the 567 models here reach 100 dB on both. That is a power count and nothing more; whether either source suits a given headphone also depends on the two lines above.
The counts above say how many models the two treat differently. This says by how much. The same 8 headphones appear on every page of this kind, ordered from the easiest to drive to the hardest, so a row can be read across pages as well as across columns. Headroom is at a 100 dB SPL peak.
The widest gap on the list is the Audio-Technica ATH-R70X: Matrix element M2 has +21 dB of headroom there against +17 dB. 4 dB is about 2.2 times the power, which matters for peaks rather than for how loud the music sits.
The hiss columns are empty for Benchmark DAC3 HGC and Matrix element M2 because neither maker publishes no output noise figure. That is a gap in the specification, not a quiet amplifier, and it is left blank here rather than filled with a plausible number.
| Headphone | Impedance | Needs | Benchmark DAC3 HGC headroom | Matrix element M2 headroom | Benchmark DAC3 HGC hiss | Matrix element M2 hiss |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Shure SE846 | 9 Ω | 0.04 mW | +40 dB | +39 dB damping | not published | not published |
| Campfire Audio Andromeda 2020 | 9 Ω | 4.0 mW | +20 dB | +19 dB damping | not published | not published |
| Audeze LCD-2 Classic | 70 Ω | 0.79 mW | +28 dB | +29 dB damping | not published | not published |
| Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro (250Ω) | 250 Ω | 0.63 mW | +24 dB | +27 dB | not published | not published |
| HiFiMAN HE400se | 25 Ω | 7.9 mW | +21 dB | +21 dB damping | not published | not published |
| Audio-Technica ATH-R70X | 470 Ω | 1.6 mW | +17 dB | +21 dB | not published | not published |
| Sennheiser HD 600 | 300 Ω | 6.6 mW | +13 dB | +16 dB | not published | not published |
| HiFiMAN Susvara | 60 Ω | 50 mW | +11 dB | +12 dB damping | not published | not published |
The Matrix element M2 costs $600 more than the Benchmark DAC3 HGC, and on these three axes the money buys nothing: among the 567 models here there is not one that the Matrix element M2 handles and the Benchmark DAC3 HGC does not — not on power, not on the one-eighth rule, not on hiss. The traffic runs the other way: the cheaper Benchmark DAC3 HGC leaves 520 models alone under the one-eighth rule that the Matrix element M2 does not.
Everything in this paragraph counts only figures the two makers published. An advantage on an axis one of them leaves blank cannot be counted, and is not counted — how often that happens is its own page.
Each has a page of its own with every power figure traced to what the maker published and a full headphone list: Benchmark DAC3 HGC and Matrix element M2. Or put either against your own headphones in the source comparison tool.