Things which was better in Blade Runner 2049 than in BR1982?

Zilch

- The lead performance
- The sound design (both are great, of course)

I think that's about it really. I mean, the effects in the new one are obviously better from a technical standpoint but the first one still has astonishing stuff which is particularly impressive for its time.

I thought hard about the cinematography and they're pretty much equal to me.

Ryan Gosling. 

I like the original an awful lot but it always felt like such a drag in the second act - I often forget it's not even 2 hours. I put off 2049 for a bit because that 164-minute runtime felt pretty daunting if it was going to be as languid, only to be pleasantly surprised at how superbly paced it was.

Everything besides Roy Batty.

Lots of things: K is a much more interesting protagonist than Deckard, the script has a more compelling plot, please don't crucify me but (apart from the "Tears in Rain" theme from the original) I think the score is more consistently awesome, Ford's performance is better, it has a MUCH better love story and a better ending. Most importantly, it's a FAR more emotionally affecting film. I absolutely adore the original, but I mainly love it for the technical aspects. The only moment I actually feel any emotion is during Batty's monologue. 2049 is nowhere near as innovative or important as the original, but I am far more invested in the story. There's a wistful loneliness to it that is so beautiful to me. That scene where the billboard of Joi calls K "Joe" is just heartbreaking, calling into question the entire legitimacy of their relationship and adding such great nuance to the original's themes of free will and identity.
Personally, I highly prefer the shadowy, grimy, lived-in visual aesthetic of the original as opposed to Deakins' gorgeous but overly-clean and precise images. But other than that, I really think 2049 did the impossible and actually improved upon Scott's masterpiece.

The pacing, the characters, the cinematography (close one but still Deakins), the emotional impact etc.

I loved both, but 2049 > 1982 overall.

Cinematography, sound design, sound editing, lead character and acting. In all other fronts, they're pretty much equal for me.

but AdA though

I would say the pacing, the script, and the lead are both significantly better in 2049. Standing at almost 3 hrs 2049 felt a lot shorter than 1982 (not that 1982 was terribly slow or anything), the story was much more compelling, and Ryan Gosling delivered a much stronger performance.