RAW + JPEG...one (jpeg) out of camera, one (raw) for post processing to compare. Pretty simple, really. Shows why RAW is the way to go most of the time. Much better final image.
Well, you're wrong.
Both are RAW images, processed using ACR. This one had some adjustments applied while the other one had none, it was just a straight conversion.
It does NOT show why RAW is better. It's actually interesting seeing different JPEG engines and how a camera brand/model handles them.
RAW is really only needed for HDR or to recover details in shadows/highlights. Which pretty much what HDR is also.
Why did you use a RAW converter for a file that was originally a JPEG: http://masters.galleries.dpreview.com.s3.amazonaws.com/2376545.jpg?AWSAccessKeyId=14Y3MT0G2J4Y72K3ZXR2&Expires=1357171200&Signature=RKJpuWAAbysBGvHeDU0x80mgsho%3d ??