Yes it is, you've made a table showing the technical specification of each device. If that isn't a post showing which one is the stronger pony, I don't know what is.

What you talking about?

1) I'm basing it off of the base models and similar storage levels. Why would I need to list EVERY single storage option available?

2) Do a little more research before you talk. The new iPad has a dual core CPU and quad core GPU all on the same chip.

Read the info after the table and the OP of the supplied link. The table is for reference and comparison to illustrate a point about the raw technology and Sony's lack of foresight with the Vita.

Sorry mate, you were right. I edited my post after writing it.

My apologies for jumping down your throat and also, for my comment about the table not comparing the two.

Sorry.

edit...bit snappy today, it's a good comparison. I jumped to the conclusion it was a Sony biased table. Which let's face it, we don't need. It isn't and I was wrong for assuming that.

I'm more anti Apple but still fairness is important and it's a good comparison so I'll put a sock in it.

Interesting table nonetheless. PSV will survive a couple of years, won't reach PSP numbers, and will be the last handheld from Sony.

Put LTE next to 4G, Apple wouldn't be very happy with you if you didn't.

To all the people bashing 3DS/ Vita in favor of iPad 3:

You forget history too quickly.  Nintendo has absolutely no care for future-proofing their systems, handheld or otherwise.  They make something relatively cheap with decent features, and it sells like hotcakes because of the first and third-party game lineup that they pump out. Same with Sony, though I'll concede, Sony makes a slightly bigger deal out of specs than Nintendo does.  But regardless...

iPads don't have any buttons, or sticks, and they're big and heavy.  It's not a proper portable console, and it has no need to be.  It is designed for rich people like my dad who likes to buy toys and gadgets for it and check email on while sitting in a fancy hall waiting for a meeting with some other rich person. 

My point is that specs really, really don't matter.  As Nintendo and Sony have proven time and time again.  It's all about what content you can get to be only available on your system that makes people want to buy it.   So while comparing Vita or 3DS to an iPad makes for a fun tangent and semi-interesting conversation, just remember that in the grand scheme of things, like longevity and install base, it is completely and utterly irrelevant.

Just remember, the DS had N64 graphics.  It sold over 150 million units in less than six years, and doubled the install base of the entire line of Game Boy models dating back to 1989.

I understand your reasoning, but you've ignored several points:

• Ipad is not optimized for gaming
• The OS and other shit running in the background on the Ipad uses more resources, leaving less for games
• Hardly any mobile devs have the budget and/or take the time to take full advantage of the tech they are working on. (How many games look like Infinity Blade 2? You could probably count them on one hand)
• PSVITA has a significantly better CPU
• Games on the Ipad are being rendered at a MUCH higher resolution
• PSVITA has a physical controls which works very well, this is arguably the biggest point here

Which is why I'm showing error in your reasoning  which is based on Ipad matching PSV as gaming device.

You really think the Vita is competing with the iPad? You're delusional.

BTW the Vita's GPU is better. new iPad ends with MP2 but the Vita is MP4+.

So Vita has better everything except screen resolution.