I dunno, now that you phrased it this way I feel like it does matter.
Image he took a blow-torch to a safe and the door welded shut. The contents are still there but the door is broken.
Image he took a blow-torch to a safe and the door welded shut. The contents are still there but the door is broken.
This analogue isn't perfect, but it isn't relevant anyway: the laws in question criminalize acts based on their intent.
The blowtorch wasn't intended to destroy the contents of the safe (a la deletion of a key), but even still: if the intent was to impede or delay the investigation by welding the safe shut, it would be equally criminal.