Why swap Cree for Luxeon? I thought Cree was more efficient?
Efficiency is pretty close, depending on the current used, it could go either way. Cree handles more power and has the ability to put out more light but Philips seems to put out a hair more when both are driven in the range that I actually use. As far as I'm concerned, it's so close that it's a dead heat.
OTOH, Cree does not make a XT-E in the proper wavelength for photosynthesis in Chlorophyll A, the predominent pigment in most corals. Chlorophyll A requires light below 450nm, in fact, photosynthesis falls off to near zero and almost exactly 450nm. Cree makes XT-E Royal Blue in a number of bins with peaks between 450 and 465nm but nothing below 450nm, using the lowest bin will get you some light in the proper range but most of the output is more suitable for Chlorophyll B which is found in plants, in the aquarium it's found in algae.
Luxeons are available in bins from 440-450nm, this is within the action spectrum for Chlorophyll A so the majority of the light produced is useable for photosynthesis. I've used both emitter side by side, on the same driver and found that the Philips has a Vf that is 1-2% lower than the XT-E so it is using 1-2% less power at the same current level. To my uncalibrated eye, the Philips looked a hair brighter, if anything the lower wavelength should look a hair dimmer as the human eye does not respond to it as well, so it was certainly putting out slightly more light. Both LEDs are on the same heatsinks and the design allows for checking the temperature right behind the star. To my uncalibrated finger, the Crees run slightly hotter than the Philips. A nice lab quality temp probe showed differences of 2-5 degrees. I can't say that my measurement methods were perfect but I am convinced that there is a small difference in Philips' favor.
I have neither the test equipment, nor the methodology to state that one brand is better than the other from a 100% scientific viewpoint so YMMV. I have studied the specs for both and IMHO, the quantity of light produced and the efficiency is very near equal at the currents I use (500-1000mA) and the Philips offers better spectrum when it comes to supporting photosynthesis. I have also used both LEDs under identical conditions and my non-scientific experience is that the Philips puts out slightly more light and shightly less heat, while using slightly less energy.
Did I mention that this is all IMHO, and YMMV? I've used both and I will be using only the Philips in the future.