These two sentences are incongruous. If you want to compare things, compare similar things. You mention EC could return an out of date value, but don't bring up the positive tradeoff (HA when nodes are down). More subtly, the phrasing. The first sentence starts with "In an eventually consistent system...", while the second jumps right in with "Strong consistency means...". It's somewhat jarring. How about something like this (I also took the liberty of dropping filler words):

> In an eventually consistent system, reading an object from a yet-to-be-replicated node could return an older value, with the benefit that reads and writes are highly available. Compare this with a strongly consistent system, where you never see out-of-date values, with the drawback that some writes may fail if a node is unreachable.