"Dynamically compiled" and dynamic linking are very different things, and in turn dynamic linking is completely different from system calls and inter-process communication. I'm no emulation expert but I'm pretty sure you can't just swap out a dynamically linked library for a different architecture's build for it at link time and expect the ABI to somehow work out, unless you only do this with a small few manually vetted libraries where you can clean up the ABI. Calling into drivers or communicating with other processes that run as the native architecture is generally fine, at least.
I don't know how much Asahi makes use of the capability (if at all), but Apple's M series processors add special architecture extensions that makes x86 emulation be able to perform much better than on any other ARM system.
I wouldn't deny that you can get a lot of things playable enough, but this is very much not hardware you get for the purpose of gaming: getting a CPU and motherboard combo that costs $1440 (64-core 2.2GHz) or $2350 (128-core 2.6GHz) that performs substantially worse at most games than a $300 Ryzen CPU+motherboard combo (and has GPU compatibility quirks to boot) will be very disappointing if that's what you want it for. Though the same could to a lesser extent be said even about x86 workstations that prioritize core count like Xeon/Epyc/Threadripper. For compiling code, running automated tests, and other highly threaded workloads, this hardware is quite a treat.
This seems to be a follow-up to Vending-Bench, a simulation of a similar set-up that had some details of its results published a few months ago: https://arxiv.org/html/2502.15840v1
Unlike this one, that was just a simulation without real money, goods, or customers, but it likewise showed various AI meltdowns like trying to email the FBI about "financial crimes" due to seeing operating costs debited, and other sessions with snippets like: