Like I said it's all about opinions.
When I watch Ronaldo what I saw was a physical freak who could do amazing things due to his physique, but imo that type of player doesn't exert the same amount of influence into a team as a player who beat you by bamboozling and out thinking you.
In a way its similar to Mike Tyson's influence on his sport - a physical freak who dominated at an early age due to speed and physique that no one had ever seen before, but as his body changed and he didn't work on changing his style with it, he could never quite scale the heights of his early years
What a horrible analogy lol Also you didn't even confirm if that's what you're talking about lol
Ronaldo didn't rely solely on speed - it was something he had. Literally a video above your post showing great technique and him getting kicked to bits yet remaining on the ground, having assists, good vision, great first touch and passing, and obviously finishing. His career was roughly 18 years mate, not 3.
Of course Zidane was better as an orchestrator, as that was his position and role. By your logic (which is honestly Davek levels) - Beckham was better than Zidane then, as he could put a good cross in and beat his man without being the paciest player on the pitch. Almost if he's a winger and not a central/attacking mid lol Or saying "Yeah but Zizou was a worse goalscorer"... well, yeah, his job was to create, not to score, right?
Ronaldo created and scored, before the injury using absolutely ridiculous physique, then post-injury when he didn't have the pace - he used technique and movement, believe it or not. As I said - he was bordering on being an actual ball himself and still scoring and assisting in Brazil and, because people will say "farmer's league" - also 9 in 20 in his obesity seasons in Milan. You know, the home of defending or whatever.
In fact, if you don't believe what literally everyone in world football says (again, including Zidane) - there's a video above, again. lol