head to head
Neither is meaningfully harder - they pose close to the same test. The widest gap is reads, and it is a single point.

Optimization · Grand Arena
Fast tiberium-economy RTS with a once-thriving competitive 1v1 scene.

Reads · Grand Arena
Grimdark RTS where requisition nodes, squad reinforcement, and chapter counter-picks define competitive depth.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars leans Optimization (Grand Arena); Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War leans Reads (Grand Arena).
Same score on execution - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Fast micro on squads and harvesters
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Squad retreat timing and builder unit micro require practiced hands
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War leans a little harder on reads, though the gap is small.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Ranked 1v1 rewards reading enemy tech paths
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Opponent chapter choice and rush timing must be predicted
Same score on variance - which means the number cannot separate them. The difference is in what each one asks of you.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Fog hides tech switches until scouted
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Relic capture variance and squad reinforcement timing add uncertainty
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars leans a little harder on optimization, though the gap is small.
Command & Conquer 3: Tiberium Wars
Tight build orders and tiberium control
Warhammer 40,000: Dawn of War
Requisition node priority and tech tree builds are well-studied
A matching score does not mean a matching test. Two games can both sit at 10 on execution and demand completely different things of you - which is why the reasoning above matters more than the number beside it.