No, they don't compare it to a real EF lens. But I read it as implying that the lens configuration they show are typical conceptual approaches they would take when designing an EF lens.They don't actually compare it to an EF lens, just a simulation of a lens using a configuration similar to EF...
Canon have been very careful not to directly compare lenses across the two mounts. The 70-200 2.8 and 50 1.8 certainly don't perform better than heir EF predecessors.
Both lenses you mentioned are significantly smaller and in the case of the 70-200 also much lighter than their predecessors. In what way is that not better?
I have not bothered looking at side by side comparisons of the 70-200. But the RF 50 mm 1.8 is clearly much better in the edges compared to the EF one.