I already said there was a huge set of unstructured and structured data fed into the brain over one to two decades before usefulness. The difference is brain architecture doesnt require an insane number of the exact thing you want it to do. It extrapolates with existing data with small training set. Further, it shows somd common sense and adaptation in how it handles weird stuff.
Try doing that with existing schemes. The data set within their constraints would dwarf what a brain takes with less results.
The comparison is contaminated by the test being preselected for a skill that humans are good at (i.e. the game has been designed to be within the human skill range of someone from a modern society).
I am sure you could design a game around the strengths of modern AI’s that no human could ever win. What would this tell us?
I have no idea. Humans are optimized to win at the real world against each other and all other species. That's a non-ideal environment, too. Designing an AI to win in a world or environment optimized for them might be interesting in some way. Just doubt it would matter for practical applications in a messy world inhabited by humans.
Try doing that with existing schemes. The data set within their constraints would dwarf what a brain takes with less results.