ENTED64's answer was phrased carefully to give a non-answer, because that is all we can say to the question you asked.
"On par" is deliberately so vague, and qualified with "exact capability is classified" and "general assumption," to make it so that one is not able to derive any particular detailed conclusions apart from "both are modern fighter AESAs".
In other words, it is a polite way of conveying that the question you originally asked was unanswerable in any level of detail.
The fact that you are asking more detailed questions after his answer means that you have missed his point entirely.
I will put it more bluntly -- the original question about asking in any level of detail comparing J-20A's radar and that of F-35 is unnecessary and cannot be really substantiated by us. The best answer is "they're both modern fighter AESAs" and there is no reason to try to derive anything more.
===
Various subsequent posts deleted, for "he said/they said" misunderstandings and people lacking common sense.
====
@ZeEa5KPul
Quoting Pisigma as an answer is nice and all, but really the proof in the pudding will be seeing J-20As with WS-15s in serial production and delivery.
I think there is a good chance that is happening... but naturally we have to consider the idea that initial serial J-20As may be powered by WS-10s considering some J-20A prototypes had WS-10s.
Last edited: