Yes, power use is close with the Nv cards eeking it out for what little that is worth.
I wouldn't call a ~25% difference in power use "a bit more power hungry" (225W vs 175W). With that, it isn't winning the performance /W metric either... or am I math challenged this morning?
I mean sure, but realistically in various reviews of custom AIB cards the 2060s usually consumes in the 200W region, even the 2060s reference design consumed about 5-10W more than advertised, while the RX 5700xt consumed about 5W less than advertised.
Most custom 5700xt are consuming about 235W, about 10W more than reference, with Nvidia cards generally consuming more due to higher clock profiles on those cards and better coolers. So its about 35W difference realistically, if you look at total system power consumption that number is usually a tad bit lower as well, and with the RX 5700xt being on average 7% faster at 1440p it does end up in a tie in terms of performance per watt.
Now we can take extremes where the 5700xt is 25% faster than the 2060s and count only that, or we might take extremes where the 2060s is 7-8% faster and count only that and the performance per watt will look completely different, but overall across a range of 30+ games on average the RX 5700xt is pretty much equal in terms of performance per watt to the 2060s. Maybe a tad bit weaker depending on the games, but on the other hand it's a much better performance per value.
Ultimately on this game though it seems as the RX 5700xt is beating the 2060s in terms of performance per watt.
not sure i'm seeing it. do these two images look sharp? (direct links, without our comparison viewer)
RTX on does seem blurrier and softer for sure. I'm not sure how noticeable it is in game, but you can easily spot it in the images.
Still looks okay and saves for AA. 
