Caching is rarely that simple though.

With a static site you know the output can be cached indefinitely and only invalidated by a new deploy.

With a server rendered site you can only recreate that by tracking ever piece of data a page is dependent on, tracking data changes, and invalidating any page a data change breaks.

No one does that though, so you may go for SWR or a short-ish cache window so changes take some set of minutes to roll out, looking like the delay in waiting for a static site to rebuild.

I'd never pick between static and server rendered based on caching. Factors like the size of the site, frequency of content updates, and technical skill of content authors (I've never found a git-based CMS I'd ask someone totally nontechnical to use).