JWST and Hubble have roughly similar angular resolution. Hubble marginally better. JWST needs larger mirror for the same angular resolution because it uses longer wavelengths.
Hubble: 0.04 arcsec at 500 nm
JWST: 0.068 arcsec at 2 μm
The difference is in wavelengths, image quality, and light collecting ability (size of the mirror). Hubble has to stare longer into a same spot to collect the same amount of light as JWST.
(If I remember correctly JWST took this image in less than 12 hours, Hubble stared at it for much longer. Correct me if I'm wrong).
Hubble's composite of SMACS took 5 orbits, which ends up being about a couple hours maximum. Most websites talked about the deep fields such as XDF (hundreds of orbits) while showing the comparison between the RELICS and JWST pictures, which I believe was very misleading from how this is repeated. Not to detract from its capabilities, of course.
(If I remember correctly JWST took this image in less than 12 hours, Hubble stared at it for much longer. Correct me if I'm wrong).