the red line roughly shows what the crop is (about 14.5mp) but (if you'd seen the other threads) that is only a small part of the story
View attachment 86413
The embedded profile also adjusts the white balance, boosts highlights, corrects the barrel distortion, supposedly corrects any chromatic aberration then re-scales the image back up to 20mp. These are 'destructive' edits if you use Adobe Camera Raw as there is no way you can reverse the process.
Here's what Adobe Camera Raw sees (all sliders set to zero). As you can see the shadows are way too black, whites and highlights are blown, reds way over saturated, contrast has been boosted and edge detail is much softer than in the raw file viewed in Rawtherapee. This is not what you expect of a raw file.
A quick look at the Adobe raw should tell you that there is a lot wrong - The length of the shadows suggest it was taken early morning (or late evening) so the light should be 'soft' and have a golden hue to it - exactly how it looks in the original unaltered raw. In this version it looks like midday and that's hopeless.
View attachment 86414
It doesn't matter what it compares to and how much of a bargain it is (strawman/fanboy argument) what matters is that it's not outputting what the specifications say and to some of us that matters. I can't say for sure but it's possible that if I had been aware of this issue I would have probably looked at a more expensive alternative platform - every single image being a compromise is not what I call a 'professional' piece of kit.
I said in one of the other threads that publishers and print houses don't want/refuse interpolated images so without a lot more work than should be required the P4Pro struggles to produce the kind of images that it should be capable of and that we were led to believe when we bought the product before this 'cheat' was known