http://blog.pchome.net/article/458428.html
(Simplified Chinese, Google-translated English Page Here)
Full image crops from ISO 100 to 6400 is compared. ISO 12800 and 16000 crops of the A65 images are also posted. Do note that to view the large test crops in 1920 pixels in width, you have to drag the small/thumbnail image to a new Tab and the large image will be downloaded and displayed, that's where you can (start to) measurbate! ;-)
It can be further noted that the DT11-18/4.5-5.6 lens was used on the A65 for the test, whilst the ZA24-70/2.8 was used on the FF A900. So, I believe the advantage was given to the A900 as long as the optics used are concerned.
I am really surprised that how much advancement is made for a 3 years' time. Honestly speaking, the A65 wins in colour reproduction (which is more solid and saturated), contrast level, noise control and image details. The FF A900 has just been beaten down in every aspect for the IQ! At the end of the day, if the NEX-7 is compared, I think the difference in IQ should be even larger as there is just no translucent mirror there in the image formation path!
But however, the big question is: If the same new and latest technologies are used on Full Frame and someone is to make a new camera using all these, what will happen and what are the new results? :-o :-D (But WHO will do it NEXT?!)