Hard to say. Both have equal E-cores, where something like that could run, depends a lot on the scheduler, if it needed the P-cores instead. A 100Hz difference in single thread speeds doesn't amount to much overall. And doesn't seem to make any use of the 12700's larger Lcache either.
I had to think about this, since I thought 12600K had higher boost at default and turns out it does not.
Then a small epiphany.
12700 is, by default, TDP 65W. 12600K is, by default, 125W.
So if you just pop the CPU in and do no tweaking on a mid range motherboard (not the high end stuff they review with like Maximus and Apex, more like Asus Prime or Gigabyte UD and so on) - or have an OEM rig - the CPUs will stick right around their TDP.
This is probably what those results represent, they are what typical consumer users would see.
And in that setup, the 12600K will keep its max 4.9Ghz stock clocks much better than the 12700 on multi-core workloads - almost 100% of the time in fact. The 12700 will throttle down after 7 seconds to maintain 65ish watts.
So you were "mostly right" in your original post.
12700 is > 12600K
if you increase the power limit of the 12700 via the BIOS or utility like Intel's XTU.
If that isn't done, then the 12600K @ 125W default is quite a bit better (>10%) in those applications than the 12700.
FWIW you can cool these at up to 150W with a cheap $25 cooler and some decent thermal paste like the Gammaxx 400V2.
This was interesting because, if someone ask 'which is faster' for a generic OEM or low end system out of the box and they're not going to tweak it at all, it would actually be the 12600K.