And this is a legitimate answer from lighting engineers. I’ll see about linking the exact timestamp later, but Chris Monrad goes into detail about engineering the lighting for Tucson International Airport’s ramp and parking lot lighting. From there he explains that the 7 percent efficiency difference between the 3000K and the 4000K are so small that when applied to these high lumen and low lumen parking lot/ airport ramp use cases, the total fixture output is regarded as being the same. They probably use some form of CAD software, but you can see the optical modelling they use for the parking lot lighting.

The difference exhibited between the 4000K and 3000K is 7%, you so much as loose that difference and more in optics choices. High efficiency Carclo optics are around 90 percent efficient, but can vary on the emitter choice and optical pattern chosen, wide spot or narrow flood and so on, and can have optical efficiencies in the 80 percent range. Add in an anti-reflective coated lens that has nearly the same optical gains against a glass/plastic lens as the efficiency difference between 3000K and 4000K, and the difference in efficiency is not so great. In other words, you so much as loose or gain more in optics choices then an output bin.

Users on r/Flashlight have made the observation that it takes a four fold increase in brightness for us to subjectively see a light only twice as bright. From my anecdotal experiments, I’m a little inclined to agree. Maybe not focus too much on an output bin differential?

Edit:Found it, see the above video at 49:10 for information regarding the closing of the gap of efficiency between warm white 3000K and the cooler emitters.