Hard disagree. The evocation passives are plain busted. Removing friendly fire from your aoe spells and adding spell casting modifier make for extremely potent and efficient aoe damage, whereas sorcs and warlocks have to select less targets to affect with an aoe spell so as not to splash their martials, summons, and ally npcs.
Moreover, the sheer flexibility of Wizard courtesy of scrolls is crazy.
The biggest downside to wizard is that there is very little reason to go several levels in Wizard. You only need 1 lvl to get access to every wizard spell in the game.
Specialisation bonuses
So basically 2 wizard / 10 sorc and you can also have all the flexibility, evocation specialization, metamagics, and just give up your level 6 spell slot?
Lol, vastly superior to pure Wizard.
But what flexibility do you even need when 90% of the spells are garbage? Wizards in 5e simply seem like a newbie trick, the flexibility seems great on paper until you realize it really isnt.
You can still only cast the same number of spells either way, and I haven't found any need for any of the 'utility spells', which you can also get most of on Druids anyway and the game gives you 2 druid companions.
People mentioning 'I've played wizard and its good', but have you actually compared it to a sorc's metamagics? Have you even seen what heightened holds do? Nullify all the mobs in most encounters and score auto crits? What utility would I need to ever have to give up heightened hold?