Bias in favor of what, or of whom? I've been working with low-power stuff for a while now (I will be giving a solar power class this Saturday in fact), and hoped that AM1 would be a good choice for an environment in which every watt counts. This was an experiment, to find that out. If Scrooge used 10W less, it might still be worth the loss in performance, especially in non-gaming tasks (this PC might be used in one of those off-grid tiny houses, where gaming at all may not matter), but for my needs, it turned out not to be quite good enough; perhaps "sufferable," but no more. It will be interesting to see (for me, anyway), what the power numbers of a G4400 look like.
A DC adapter could lower the power used due to removal of conversion losses, especially in the intended environment; in particular I was thinking of a 12V->19V auto adapter, in which losses might be trivial because you're removing two conversion steps (12V AGM -> 120VAC -> 19VDC).
This was never a head-to-head comparison of the G3258 vs. the 5350, and I stated a few reasons in the article. Just as a nature photographer may toss a quarter into a picture to provide scale though, I needed something else to serve that purpose. The CPU I'd been using in previous motherboard tests seemed a reasonable choice for that. Insofar as games often rely more on the graphics card than on the CPU, the GTX750Ti vs. GT730 Heaven numbers supported that, even with a stronger CPU behind the GT730. Yes, it's a synthetic, but even +/- a whopping 20% wouldn't change the obvious confirmation.