That's a great question- Tom's hierarchy is a nice go-to resource, with handy quick reference charts and tables, but they aren't the only ones doing rigorous testing. There are other well-regarded testers doing exhaustive and thorough testing- Techpowerup, Hardware Unboxed aka Techspot, ComputerBase to name a few I like.
What a meta review does is open up the test configurations and environments, broaden the number of tested games, reduce biases, and minimize errors because of the significantly larger data set. In my view, the meta review data is more reliable because of all these reasons.
All that said, if comparing this table with Tom's or TPU's or HUB's tables, we will see similar ballparks and patterns.
Game selection widens considerably in such meta reviews actually, since testers test different sets of games. I had checked for the same two GPUs in Tom's hierarchy before posting, since I too was suspicious of the 4070 Ti trumping 6950 XT at 1440p. But Tom's confirms the trend, with 4070 Ti clocking 115.1 fps, and 6950 XT at 113.7.
They test with Borderlands 3 (DX12), Far Cry 6 (DX12), Flight Simulator (DX11 AMD/DX12 Intel/Nvidia), Forza Horizon 5 (DX12), Horizon Zero Dawn (DX12), Red Dead Redemption 2 (Vulkan), Total War Warhammer 3 (DX11), and Watch Dogs Legion (DX12).
Regarding whether BG3 and Jedi Survivor were tested elsewhere, they were likely not, at least BG3 was not. The 6950 data was either pulled from 4070 Ti or 4070 meta review shortly after their release, and these games weren't available then. This is one of the caveats I point out in the original post.