I can't complain about the RX 6700 XT OC I have here, but the listed "average" for 1440p is somewhat misleading for a number of games when not using upscaling and when having graphics at max. I.e. in Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition, with raytracing at high and graphics at max, I get around 50 FPS - which is fine enough to play the game with, which arguably is a top-range example, but hardly anywhere near what the listed "average" would suggest.
Of course, it isn't just AMD who are presenting stuff like that. E.g. for the PS5, one has to go into the fine-print to find out that only a handful of games support native 4K (and then only at 60 FPS, unlike the stated output of up to 120 FPS), while many other games get upscaled from 1080p. And one can of course argue that even upscaled FPS still count as FPS.
But in this particular case, if AMD would not try to sell me (upscaled) 220 FPS in 4K for a 2D chessboard, but would instead show if e.g. RX 7900 XTX (with optimized driver) can run e.g. Metro Exodus Enhanced Edition at max with i.e. 80 FPS in 4K, then that would rather speak to me. Which isn't to say that I would not care about independent reviews anymore. But as far I am concerned, I rather play a graphically nice game at 80 FPS than a graphically somewhat simple game at 220 FPS, where the 4K resolution is additionally a bit of a moot point.