Boomerang, the NAC-2 computer is adequate to drive low-current draw hydraulic pumps such as the RPU80. The NAC-3 will drive high current pumps such as the RPU160. So, yes, if one already has in place an RPU80 pump, the NAC-3 is overkill as you say. Simrad's literature says the NAC-2 is suitable for boats up to 35 feet long. My boat is 44 feet long and weighs 56,000 lbs and came with an RPU80 pump. I chose the NAC-3 because I was concerned that, at some point, the RPU80 would fail trying to control so much weight. I wanted the ability to replace it with an RPU160 if, indeed, it did fail.
The output pressure of both is the same but the RPU160 has more than double the fluid volume capacity and double the flow rate. I do not know whether my system is too large in volume for my RPU80 nor do I know, if it is, whether my system would operate "better" with a RPU160.
But, when we crossed the Gulf of Mexico from Carabelle to Tarpon Springs on a night when we encountered unexpected very rough conditions, my system was very much put to the test. Piloting from the lower helm from where I could easily hear the pump at work, for twelve hours, that RPU80 absolutely screamed virtually constantly. Perhaps it was no big deal for that pump but I can tell you that I was just waiting for that pump to fail. I suppose from my experience one could deduce that the RPU80 is sufficiently large for my system. Or, the pump may be on its last legs.
The NAC-3 cost $400 more, not a lot to ensure future flexibility. I also wonder whether the NAC-3 has different algorithms to control heavier boats. Perhaps not.
CK-R ,sorry for the late reply and I hope you've already gotten your answer but the RF300 and RPU80 pump will work with the NAC3 but the RFC35 compass will not. The NAC3 is way overkill for the RPU80, btw.