[turbopack] Discuss Core Web vitals in our bundle size gap docs

docs/01-app/03-api-reference/08-turbopack.mdx

@@ -134,6 +134,8 @@ This can lead to subtle rendering changes when adopting Turbopack, if applicatio
 
 ### Bundle Sizes
 
+From our testing on production applications, we observed that Turbopack generally produces bundles that are similar in size to Webpack. However, the comparison can be difficult since turbopack tends to produce fewer but larger chunks. Our advice is to focuse higher level metrics like [Core Web Vitals](https://web.dev/articles/vitals) or your own application level metrics to compare performance across the two bundlers. We are however aware of one gap that can occasionally cause a large regression.
+
 Turbopack does not yet have an equivalent to the [Inner Graph Optimization](https://webpack.js.org/configuration/optimization/#optimizationinnergraph) in webpack which is enabled by default. This optimization is useful to tree shake large modules. For example:
 
 ```js filename=large.module.js
@@ -148,7 +150,7 @@ export const CONSTANT_VALUE = 3
 
 If an application only uses `CONSTANT_VALUE` Turbopack will detect this and delete the `usesHeavy` export but not the corresponding `import`. However, with the Inner Graph Optimization, webpack can delete the `import` too which can drop the dependency as well.
 
-We are planning to offer an equivalent to the Inner Graph Optimization in Turbopack but it is still under development. If you are affected by this gap, consider manually splitting these modules.
+We are planning to offer an equivalent to the Inner Graph Optimization in Turbopack but it is still under development. If you are affected by this gap, consider manually splitting modules.
 
 ### Build Caching