Let me note that I'm a sniper(LE) first and foremost so my priorities may not align with that of others. Because I didn't find the 1.93 height was ideal for my setup, I didn't spend as much time with it as I would need to make that direct comparison. If you count HK 416's which have a higher rail and sit optics up about 1/3? of an inch...leaving optics 1.87ish inches high when using a 1.54" mount then I noted no difficulty with that.
The only time I have had issues with "imperfect" positions related to optic height is when using the 1.375" and not being able to get behind the optic when used in conjunction with my preferred SOPMOD stock. In some cases height-over bore could afford you a little more difficulty with some VTAC wall openings and loopholes...but nothing that I've encountered yet in the real world. You always have mechanical offset to contend with.
What I have noticed in the 1.54 vs. 1.93 in recent years is that even IF you don't need to clear an IR/laser/DBAL housing, the proliferation of longer rails and true(r) and shorter 1x optics means that you could likely have a fair amount of rail in your sight picture at the bottom end of your magnification. Part of this depends greatly on how you mount the gun/put your face ...thus affecting how far forward you put the optic. If you run Nose-to-charging handle, you likely mount optics farther forward. I don't and mount most of my LPVO's eyepieces are about in line with the rear of the charging handle. Now add a 14 or 15" rail with a back up iron front sight, and you'll likely see it in your FOV. If for some reason you have 20MOA can't (which is unnecessary with an LPVO), it will also make this problem worse. A little is fine, but one can realistically stack these conditions to leave a whole bunch of crap in your way.