I'm no baller but have owned a single engine V and cat (tunnel hull probably more accurate description) both similar lengths (2000 Checkmate 259 Convincor & 2004 American Offshore 2600 NSX). My experience however is that X-dimension and propelller design/pitch size influence planing performance more than hull design. The American Offshore has an X-dimension that is higher than the bottom of the boat by approximately 1/2 inch. The Checkmate's X-dimension was significantly deeper than the bottom of the boat. The American Offshore also is running a 34 pitch B1 prop while the Checkmate was running a 26 B1 prop. The Checkmate would plane well with a full load of gear and people. The American Offshore needs some weight distributed towards the bow with a full load of corn fed passengers. Here are a few pics to highlight the difference in propeller depth of the two boats.

That's a pretty loaded question with no rite answer. We have similar engines going to come down to the set up more than anything. I would love to see how my power ran in a 36 skater. My power pushed my apache to 110.7 with no dialing in with propellers.

I'm mainly just referring to how much load is on the engine.

My only concern about tunnel hulls was easier to flip. Would rather get caught in ruff water in V hull. Cat hull more efficient Vhull less efficient.
Except my 23.5' seebold. Prop calcs for it were more exact using tunnel hull calcs for slippage that is

Stock set up for drive height, same motor, Bravo 1 drive, same Bravo prop, 22 Donzi Classic went 82 mph Gps , 22 Daytona went 104 mph Gps.

that speaks for itself! but RPM were sure different with same prop at 82 and 104 mph!! revs up to 10 000 rpm ? or a lot smaller drive gear ratio ?

It was a long time ago, I'm sure there was a RPM difference, all stock the prop was deeper in the water on the Donzi. The V- hull just didn't run like the cat.