No, they aren't, that's my point. Neither Chrome nor Flash can expect patch pickup in the order of days - in fact, Flash updates (on Windows and OSX at least) require user intervention, whereas Chrome will do it at browser restart.
One of these is much more likely to occur than the other.
In any case, Chrome's update mechanism promises to get more users patched, quicker, than Flash. Waiting for Flash is nonsensical.
I don't think "nonsensical" is the word you want to use here. The majority of the world's susceptible Flash users are not running Chrome. You can reasonably assert that it's not Google's problem that their patch discloses the flaw without providing those people with a usable recourse from it, but it's harder to assert that it's not a problem at all.
My point is when there's a critical Flash update, Chrome doesn't notify me ASAP. So my Chrome might be open for days with a vulnerable Flash without me knowing that it's time to restart. This is why I check About Chrome almost daily (kind of an annoying obsession).
By comparison, on Windows and OSX when there's a Flash update, the user will be notified when the update arrives.
So Chrome delivers the Flash patch really fast, but then doesn't notify users that they need to get it.
And Adobe and Apple deliver the Flash patch slowly, but the user is notified.
Neither of these situations is ideal. What I want is fast arrival of the patch, plus notification. I guess I will look for a Chrome bug on this.
One of these is much more likely to occur than the other.
In any case, Chrome's update mechanism promises to get more users patched, quicker, than Flash. Waiting for Flash is nonsensical.