Thanks for one of the few really on-point comments here beside all the "but it runs hot" or "but my cooler runs better on intel now then on amd?" comments from people who don't understand heat-dissipation, heat or energy transportation through materials, heat-gaps and bridges or aerodynamics (but saw xyz proven in a vid somewhere or a leak-picture which HAS TO BE true).
I mean I get it. Everyone wants to see comparisons between absolute equal systems - but that'll never happen. Even with the same cooler, the same PSU, the same GPU, the exact same case-fan-speeds and room-temperature you'll not get a 100% comparison. Why? The same cooler performs differently on any cpu. No matter if you're talkin 8th/9th/12th gen Intel or Intel vs AMD. They are designed for a specific purpose for a specific cpu or a "will fit all" scenario not taking into account where/how the heat-areas are and the general requirements to get the heat from zone a/b/c away but a general "just slap it on" mentality.
I can only add a few things:
1. The average user (or even the average PC enthusiast) doesn't care about physics. They just want a CPU that works in their system.
2. The vast majority of people love drawing general conclusions out of their own specific experiences. They don't have the perspective to see further, which is not necessarily a bad thing, just a fact.
3. Speaking of perspective, the average user doesn't have the money (or willingness) to try various different systems just to see how they work, so their only source of information is the online reviews. Unfortunately, journalism in general is trending towards emotional influencing and away from factual presentations. You'll sooner hear a youtuber say "oh Jesus Christ's mother, is this chip hot" or "AMD is super efficient" than discuss how you'd have to set up your power limits with different levels of cooling and airflow. Our average user has no choice but to give credit to these (often false, or at least one-sided) comments about specific use cases that are far from what he/she needs the CPU for to begin with.
I was lucky enough to have tried several different Zen 2 and 3 chips before I settled with my Core i7-11700 as the brain in my main rig for the next few years. The 5950X is a beast and I had no problem cooling it with a 240 mm AIO in a mid tower case. I just wanted to save some money and desktop space by going SFF (once again after the last couple years). In that situation, even a 3600 didn't work - hence the 11700, which I'm absolutely happy with. I also have a 3100 which I'm also happy with in my HTPC - being the coolest and least hungry modern AMD CPU. These are all excellent CPUs, but you need to know what you want to use them for, and in what kind of system with what kind of cooling setup. It also doesn't hurt to know your options in terms of power limit configurations and expected performance. Unfortunately, the media isn't filled with such information (unlike catchy titles and results taken from extreme scenarios).
In general, I don't think it's only the user's fault that they're misinformed. The media plays a huge role. Personally, I think it's awesome to see so such distinct, but very capable architectures from Intel and AMD.