I had a big big answer based on erroneus size data. Anyway yes those numbers are off, by three decimal places. I suspect the decimal that crept into Jupiter's size simply should not be there(When I multiplied Neptune's size number he gave, by the mass difference I got 5623.8, small enough difference that we could simply be using mass numbers with different imperfections due to rounding). It could also be that he typo'd a dot instead of a comma. IE: he meant it to be 5,639.