Yes, but when you only count cylinder numbers instead of actual displacement and HP numbers, is where most folks screw up. Prime example... 6.7 Powerstroke has 8 cylinders, with only .8375 L of displacement per cylinder... 6.7 Cummins has 6 cylinders, and has 1.1167 L of displacement per cylinder.
And while the 6.7 PowerChoke V8 might produce more HP and turn higher RPM's, the old straight-6 Cummins will produce nearly a 1:2 HP to TQ ratio when you start building performance, and will out-pull the PowerChoke and the Durasmack any day of the week.
As for V6 vs. V8, I am an all-American V8 guy when it comes to muscle cars and sportscars. To me personally, it's V8 or nothing. But, a funny one is comparing the 2010 Mustang GT 4.6L V8 (315 HP) to the 2011 Mustang V6 (305 HP)... The new naturally-aspirated V6 they put into the 2011 models had 10 less horsepower, than the previous year's 4.6L V8. In a scenario like this, the 2011 V6 car, with the extra weight savings and only 10 less HP, might actually beat the 2010 V8 car...
But I will put it in a V8 to V8 comparison... Chevy guys love to talk about how much HP the new 2018 6.2L Camaro produces...455 HP. Well, the new 2018 Mustang has a tiny little 5.0L V8 that produces about 5
MORE HP in stock form...460 HP. And it ****ES Chevy supporters off, because they're getting their asses handed to them by a car with a much smaller motor. The Chevy may produce more torque, but torque doesn't win drag races. It's all about the efficiency and HP numbers the motor produces, and not running out of RPM's before tripping the beam, and having your car properly setup.
That's why I laugh when folks still think like it's 1940 when they talk about cartridges, and think that just by stuffing crap-tons of powder behind something makes it better. There is a balance, and it has to be found, or else you're cheating yourself either too much, or too little.