Perhaps you could look at the many comparison reviews on line including on YouTube OR be far more specific about what specific question you are precisely looking to be answered.
"What do you mean by more accurate"? ALL Z-mount and AF-S lenses are accurate on the Z9 if used properly, correctly adjusted (see below) and able to keep up with subject motion.
As a rule the latest high end Z-mount glass uses "better" AF-motors, newer coatings; provide more Z controls (buttons and rings) than the f-mount equivalents and appear to have addressed many focus breathing issues that were seen in the best AF-S glass. BUT where direct comparisons of image sharpness have been made the differences are marginal.
What also appears clear is the a Nikkor AF-S F-mount lens works very well on the Z9 -- but one MAY see benefits if one uses FoCal to optimise the AF-fine tuning (there are a growing number of us who have completed Focal tests and posted results for both Z and AF-S glass) -- in summary most Z-mount glass "needs" no fine tuning - but there have been some individual lenses which may be towards the edge of manufacturing tolerances and some have seen minor benefits from changing these settings for these lenses as well. Whereas there is a growing body of test results (so not just mine) that show AF-S glass can benefit from minor AF-fine tune adjustments when used on Z bodies (including the Z9).
Personally I love all the Z glass I own (which is why I sold all bar 1 F-mount lens last year) and I particularly like the built in TC in my two longest Z lenses - which vastly outperform the AF-S FL versions I owned before.
The Z50/1.2S is exceptional -- the AF-s 50/1.4 and 58/1.4 were both OK.
As is the Z100-400S (which is a VAST improvement over the AF-S 200-500 and 80-400).
My work horses for domestic (ie when I am forced to be at home and not in africa) work are the Z14-24/2.8S (which is vastly superior to the AF-S version); the Z24-70/2.8 (somewhat improved over the AF-S) AND the 70-200/2.8S (which is also exceptional).
The 400/4.5PF and 800/6.3PF are both exceptional -- but many like the fact the 500/PF and 300/PF are cheaper and smaller -- some folk are using the 500/PF with TC14 at 700mm with success.
The Z105/2.8MC - is exceptional; but then so are the 40/2, 28/2.8 and 24-120/4S -- to be honest all the f/1.8 and f/4 Z lenses appear to be very good and "far" better than their f-mount equivalents.
I wait for DxOMark and other systematic tresters to complete their testing to see the results of very specific tests for my comparison of lenses. AND yes I wait to see these tests completed on the cameras I use -- so that is the Z9.
Folk like @JimKasson also perform their own tests which have proven exceptionally useful to many of us in the past -- not least in the medium format "group" on DPR Forums. So do be a little more respectful when folk are simply trying to answer your question. Just be more specific in what it is you are seeking.