超分辨率可能掩盖缺陷，需以检测能力而非图像清晰度评估。

Super-resolution can make inspection images appear sharper without preserving the evidence needed to detect a defect. We study this failure mode with a benchmark that separates reconstruction from detection and evaluates both at a predeclared low false-positive rate. Ten end-to-end repetitions combine independently generated line/space and contact-hole images with model training, calibration, clean controls, weak defects, and a held-out defect morphology. Every reconstruction is scored by the same local residual detector, while direct and jointly trained detectors form a separate comparison track. Reconstruction fidelity and inspection utility diverge: the two learned reconstruction models attain the highest structural similarity yet detect fewer defect pixels than bicubic interpolation in every paired repetition. A direct DeepLabV3 detector reaches $0.1984\pm0.0385$ recall at $0.000174\pm0.000084$ false-positive rate and satisfies the held-out feasibility criterion in all ten repetitions. An illustrative joint model, DPU-WaferSR, passes independent clean calibration but exceeds the held-out limit in all ten repetitions, demonstrating that calibration success does not guarantee transfer. Weak-defect recall remains near zero for every feasible method. Applying the unchanged policies to 4,591 public Carinthia-S masks further reveals large method-dependent shifts on real SEM texture. These results support a simple conclusion: super-resolution for inspection should be judged by preserved task evidence and operating-point transfer, not reconstruction quality alone.