Here's a major issue when discussing DBZ characters...I've stated this before in other threads and I'll state it again:
You can debate using DBZers one of two ways.... The first is to use them as if they're regular comic book characters dictating that the feats they present on panel alone are examples of their limitations. While this makes it easier to argue using far less speculation... it's also a meathod that discredits the characters and is not an accurate assessment of their overall power.
Which leads to the second... if one wants to accurately debate using DBZ characters, you HAVE to account for power stacking...
Ironically enough someone already tried to discredit DBZ supporters in this thread with an assessment that really ties things together here... "you rely too much on how things look instead of how they are".
The issue with DBZ characters and most Shonen Jump characters for that matter is that they typically already start out at VERY powerful levels, and that their continual growth in power is analogous with typical comic book upgrades.
---when a US comic character gets an upgrade it's automatically and DEFINITELY worth noting because it changes the dynamic of any given fight. No one would be comfortable comparing "the Other" Spiderman to his classic 1960's incarnation and any attempts to do so would be wholy ignorable beause it would lack any merit given the differences between both versions. ---
The thing about DBZ characters is that they're walking plot holes: When you want to make characters that are already at a planetary busting level and THEN make them hundreds, to thousands, to millions of times stronger than that through the course of the series, the only way you can really represent that without outright destroying universes, or ripping through the threads of reality etc, is to flat out state the differences in strength levels which DBZ did multitudes of times.
DBZ is the HOME of ABC logic, because that's the only way characters are capable of beating one another... by being outright more powerful than they're opponent and hitting them with attacks that are of that power. There are MAYBE a handful of exceptions to that rule through the entire series, but for the most part, it holds true.
Now all of this might sound like a digression but it has very much to do with Black Bolt's post...
Do we need to prove that every attack is of a planet busting level in the Frieza fight?
Logically speaking?.... Not necessarily... No.
And here's why
--- We've seen that DBZ characters can bust cities, moons, and other planetary bodies without taxing their full power or even approaching it.
We've also seen that "all out" attacks from characters of that power level literally do not even leave scratches on stronger opponents.
Given those facts, it's very illogical to assume that ANY character in DBZ would attack an enemy with a weaker level of power then they are capable of dishing out because any attack used in moderation against a stronger opponent would be absolutely useless.
So then, this presumption that attacks from known planet busters are not at a planet busting level just because they don't do the proper collateral damage with every attack is incredibly logically unsound given the overall narrative of the story.
Don't get me wrong, you CAN argue like that, but it's a bit disengenuous to do so.
DBZ threads inherently lend themselves to "either/or" types of discussions, they're not limited to quantifiable feats alone.