It's also impossible to get 100% utility out of any supercomputer on the top 500 list. The overhead required to manage so many processors requires software running on many processors themselves. The "computer" is only "super" if you can give it something massively-parallel to work on. There are many problems that are not well suited for that.
The Chinese are using many slow AMD processors that use less power than Intel. The USA uses faster Intel cores for many of its top 500 entries, and it gets greater UTILITY per supercomputer than China can achieve at present
What is greater utility per supercomputer exactly?
I'm more inclined to think you are specifically trying to confuse the issue to make it look like the Chinese supercomputers are somehow inferior to the American ones. The capacity of supercomputers is measured by the Linpack benchmark suite which is the same test suite used in every case. In other words, it is pretty objective test measuring real task performance, and if some supercomputer scores higher in this test, it can be said that it will be faster than the rest of the pack in the majority of tasks that such machines are mostly used for