Clearly, each converter also has its pros and cons besides "detail sharpness" (which appears to be a holy grail or fetish among some photo forists).
But what about color reproduction, moiré, lens distortion correction etc. (aka things that you can see at much smaller sizes, sometimes even in thumbnails)?
https://www.flickr.com/gp/25805910@N05/UL3J87/
This is showing the same image processed with 8 different converters using (mostly) default settings.
Have a look at the various Siemens stars (each color presents a different challenge to the demosaicing algo).
Have a look at lens distortion correction (or non-correction).
Have a look at the vast variation of default colors. They are all over the place.
Have a look at the different brightness levels.
Obviously, different RAW converter makers can't agree on a common ISO brightness handling.
They can't agree on color rendering.
They can't agree on distortion correction.
They can't agree on basic sharpening.
They can't agree on anything.
Not even the sensor's resolution, as the results go from 15.2 via 16.0 to 16.3 megapixels.
And each converters appears to have issues with different parts of the image.
Some struggle with green Siemens starts.
Another struggles with the magenta one.
Some turn white into light blue.
Another does quite the opposite.
People think that the camera makes the image.
It doesn't. It's the RAW converter.
So choose yours wisely.