Usability (configuration, ease of migration of configuration, etc): win
Developer tools: win+++++
Speed: win (JS + speed of rendering, though this is a lot closer than it used to be)
System footprint: win
Availability of experimental features in beta: win (though from time to time Firefox does some crazy awesome shit in beta builds, Chrome is more consistent)
I've long said the only browser remotely close to Chrome is Firefox, but for me, they are a clear leader. It's unfortunate to see Mozilla behaving this way in public. I take Opera's choice of using Chromium as a validation of my assertion, and I really believe if they had chosen to use Mozilla's software instead of Google's, that Mozilla would be fairly silent right now.
Sometimes Chrome is easier to configure (With Firefox you need to enable click to play in about:config, while Chrome has a checkbox somewhere in the "advanced" menu), sometimes is harder (Try to configure a proxy in chrome)
>Ease of migration
I haven't tested it myself, but i know that Firefox can load your history/bookmarks from Internet Explorer and Chrome.
If you mean between the same browser, Firefox Sync is on par with Chrome for me.
Chrome has better tools ootb, but you can install Firebug in Firefox which is mostly on par.
You're talking about addon? Because Firefox's addon can be way more powerful than Chrome's addon.
Firefox usually uses less memory than Chrome (but it's more prone to memory leaks).
For the CPU, i don't know about Chrome, but my Firefox installation is currently using about ~1% of it