Find steed is intended to give different options than find greater steed
First, some unofficial guidance per Jeremy Crawford, lead rules designer:
Q: The Find Greater Steed kind of bugs me because 5E has so far
explicitly avoided 'greater' spells and allowed people to beef up
spells by spending larger spell slots. So why is Find Greater Steed
it's own spell?
A: Similar to the "greater" spells in the Player's Handbook—greater
invisibility and greater restoration—find greater steed provides
options that its lesser counterpart doesn't.
(emphasis mine)
So, the designer states that FGS provides access to options that FS does not allow. This seems to imply that, though unwritten, there was the assumption that the DM adjudicating FS would not allow the player to summon creatures much more powerful than the ones provided already in the list (which range from CR 1/8 to CR 1/4). Otherwise there would be no restriction on the steeds since "Your GM might allow other animals to be summoned as steeds." technically enables anything.
Previously it may have made sense to allow stronger steeds using find steed
Before Xanather's Guide to Everything was published, it makes a lot of sense to use the DM leeway built into the spell to summon more powerful creatures in DM-allowed cases. For example, a 20th level paladin seems powerful enough to be able to cast a spell giving them something other than mundane animals.
Specifically, because there were no other options available to summon more powerful steeds, DMs had to resort to using the spell in this way because there was no other way for a paladin to summon a steed higher than CR 1/2.
Even Crawford explicitly said that the DM could choose what was summoned (before XGtE):
Find steed lets you summon a warhorse, a pony, a camel, an elk, or a
mastiff. Anything else is up to the DM. #DnD
Find greater steed should now be the only way to summon more powerful steeds
As, time goes on, D&D is always changing. Rules get added and changed. Errata gets published, holes get patched, etc. In this case, a new spell was added: find greater steed. This spell was clearly added with the intent to be a more powerful option than find steed:
- It is a 4th level spell (vs find steed's 2nd level)
- It is called "greater" explicitly saying that it is intended to be more powerful
- In it, all the listed steeds are much more powerful than those listed in find steed
The very existence of find greater steed means that there was a limitation to begin with on find steed or that one was intended. What reason would the designers create a spell that would essentially replicate the effects of a lower level spell with no benefit? Why create a "greater" version if it can already be done with the original version? The answer: this is because the intent is for find steed to only be used with less powerful steeds while find greater steed would work for more powerful ones.
Another reason supporting this is that RAW imply that find steed can summon any steed with a 2nd level spell only. However, since the designers clearly have rated summoning pegasi and pertyon (eg) as a 4th level spell-worthy ability, it seems that continuing to allow this would mean that you are severely bending the spell slot economy for this spell only. Thus, making find steed much more powerful than comparable 2nd level spells. This is generally not seen as a good thing, and it would seem not to be in the interest or intent of the designers of the game to want/allow this.
What to do if a DM has already allowed more powerful steeds with find steed?
DM should do the same thing that happens when any new rule is added or old rule changed or patched: either accept the new going forward or ignore it and keep doing the way you were doing before.
Regardless of how DMs previously ruled, going forward we now have an official option that enables doing the things DMs previously had to adjudicate using the lower level spell. This provides the advantage of some additional clarity and allows for the game to be played according to the designer's intent.
If intent isn't important or if it would create an issue for the DM or players, the DM could, of course, just ignore the new spell and keep adjudicating with whatever houserules they previously used.
tl;dr
Rules as intended suggest that only FGS be used for more powerful steeds and FS used only for weaker ones.
but
RAW would technically still allow the DM to choose a mount covered in FGS with FS.
You quote this bit:
Your summon a steed that takes on a form that you choose: griffon, pegasus, peryton, dire wolf, rhinoceros, or saber-toothed tiger. The steed has the statistics of the chosen form
and by that, the answer is very straightforward. Size is one of the statistics of a monster. In fact, it's the first listed in the "Statistics" section in the intro to the Monster Manual. Since the peryton has a size statistic of medium in its description, that's the size of the summoned steed when you choose that form.
Note that non-greater, regular Find Steed also has medium-sized options (pony and mastiff). Presumably these sizes are there to support small-sized paladins (gnomes, halflings, etc.).
Best Answer
RAW, it looks like "Yes"
This question's answer really seems to fall down to which of the two rules is more specific. We have, as you pointed out, both the "at least one size larger than you" and the "[summoned] steed serves as your mount" rules. The first rule, regarding mounts in general, is the general rule covering what makes a viable mount. The second rule, of course, is more specific, since it is a spell description.
With that in mind, the "serves as your mount" would supersede the normal rules for what a viable mount is (allowing for some truly silly applications, with the proper growth spells applied). So, from a strictly RAW perspective, I would have to say that yes, this is a viable use of the spell.
But I would rule "No"
One could also read it as saying that the "at least one size larger than you" clause is actually a specific part of an otherwise general rule, and thus rule that this supersedes the strict reading of Find Steed and Find Greater Steed. Though it is a more difficult pitch to call any part of a general rule more specific than any part of a spell's description, this ruling does fit better into a common sense view of the world and requires less suspension of disbelief.
I also suspect that this falls more in line with designer intent, though I haven't done the research to back that up. Looking at it from this perspective, it's possible that the medium-sized mounts were intended to give suitable options to small characters, such as gnomes.
Because of this, and because I have so far leaned towards a more serious setting, I would probably rule "No" as per this second line of reasoning. I don't think it follows the rules as strictly, but it makes more sense to me, and after all, the rules are there to guide the DM, not to hold the DM down.
Play to the party
If your campaign or your party is going for more serious or realistic, and you lean more towards common sense rulings, then rule as I did here. But if you don't mind a bit of silliness, and especially if the whole campaign is a more light-hearted thing, then by all means allow your goliath-barbarian to drink a potion of growth while under the influence of an Enlarge Size spell and then take a leisurely (murderous) ride on the still-medium-sized mastiff!
Actually, maybe let that happen anyway, you'll be hearing about that story for years!