No, sight picture.
One of the reasons Tack and I both are saying "irons" is because with a couple of clicks one direction or the other there is no difference between a 50 yard and a 500 yard shot in terms of where you align the top of the post.
On the other hand it is the user's option whether they make those clicks or they use hold over . . or hold under. Either way there is absolutely no substitute for spending the time behind the gun learning post placement in the circle closest to your eyeball.
Dot sights are not like that. Think of them as the iMAC of rifle sights - designed for people who for whatever reason do not spend the time learning what they actually need to know either way.
. . and before the shit slinging starts . . . my AR pattern rifles have EoTechs on them. But they would not if I didn't know how to use the irons efficiently. I personally consider the dot sights beneficial because they are fast to acquire, not because of their accuracy. In fact it is my belief that those two things are at odds with each other in dot style optics. And the further away the target is the less value the dot offers . . . . again, to me anyway.