Jesus.
Buddha probably didn't really exist. If Buddha lived at all, it was sometime around 575 BC. The earliest writings that narrate a story connected to his life (the Majjhima Nikaya) are around 200 BC. That's a substantial gap.
Jesus, regardless of whether or not you are a believer, indisputably existed. (Yes, yes, there are internet arguments claiming He didn't. These arguments have difficulty with the extra-Biblical warrants for the life of Jesus - Josephus (even if you reject the authenticity of the Testimonium Flavianum, the vast majority of scholars, including skeptics, holds that there was some underlying text referencing Jesus), Tacitus, Suetonius, Julius Africanus, and the Letter of Pliny the Younger all point to the idea that Jesus of Nazareth was a historical figure.
Additionally, even the most liberal, skeptical scholar would admit that the canonical gospels were all written within 60 years of the death of Jesus. Mark was likely written within 30-40 years.
The testimony concerning the deeds and acts of Buddha diverge widely. It is exceedingly unlikely that we have any authentic words or acts of Buddha given the nearly 400 year long gap between his death (if he ever lived) and the records concerning him. Although the canonical gospels do not each affirm every particular detail of the others, there is a consistency presented in words and activities that Jesus participated in, which were attested to by people close to him temporally and geographically.
I realize there will be a big push for Buddha here. I'm not sure why. (Well, I am, but I'm not going to get into that.) We don't really have any reason to believe he was, or to believe that we know what he did.
Whatever you think of Jesus, or Christians, or Paul - the bottom line is epistemologically, we have a great more deal of certainty about who Jesus is and what he did in the historical record. Jesus has to win on that alone.
)
Official Announcement
)
)
)
)