According to James Pethokoukis and Goldman Sachs, it's not really a contest. For all its flaws, the Ryan plan allegedly saves $6.9 trillion vs Obama's $4.7 trillion over roughly the same period. There's more:
The Obama Framework likely uses the same higher growth assumptions as Obama’s February budget. When CBO re-ran that budget using its own gloomier forecast, it found the Obama plan raised $1.7 trillion less than it claimed. Ryan uses the CBO numbers. So a back-of-the-envelope estimate — adjusted for similar economic assumptions — finds the Obama Framework would only save $3 trillion vs. $6.9 trillion for the Ryan Path over ten years. And nearly 2/3 of Obama’s savings comes from higher taxes (net interest).
But the Ryan plan is sinking with the public, partly because of its stupid and ideological refusal to raise any revenues by returning to Clinton-era tax rates on the successful and wealthy, or indeed raising revenues through tax reform.
The Dish 