One of these days, Canon is finally, finally going to crack that "70 point score" barrier that Nikon has hit or exceeded five times since 2009...at least I hope so.
The thing is, back in 2003 through 2007, all Nikon users heard on web boards was the incessant bloviating and bleating about how Canon was "so superior". Sorry Canon shooters, but the days of Canon's supremacy in the sensor department are largely behind, forgotten, a thing of the past. That megapixel race thing didn't really work out for Canon the way they had planned.
One reason I chose Canon is $850 5Dc. Full frame for $850??? Wuttt?? Where would 5Dc be on the chart? Mmmmmmmhhh? How much do you have to spend to get a full frame on Nikon? I do agree with the chart though, but you cant forget about 5Dc.
The lens technology of both company is similar, and their pricing go with each other really well. If it were not for the ergonomics/build quality, the Sigma lenses are also very good, normally just a bit worse.
Check this out - the Sigma is better than Canon in terms of image quality at a cheaper price.
One day I'll learn to read those charts so I know what they actually mean
As for who beats who - eh this is why hunting after "the best" is always a manufacturers winning game - canon were top - now nikon, give it a few years and sony might tip the scales (or heck sigma might try to!)