I'd hate to say it, but I'm definitely a better GM than player.
As a player I have many of the same traits noted by others --- I get impatient/restless if things move too slow. I don't find character optimization to generally be satisfying, but as a player it's one of the only loci of control you have, so I end up leaning into it pretty heavily.
My characters inevitably end up being utility / general purpose focused, because I absolutely hate feeling useless in any given game context. I think this is one of the reasons I gravitated pretty hard to Savage Worlds for a long time, because it allows for highly competent characters across a wide range skills and focuses.
The other GMs in my group aren't generally aware of how much system matters. Everything gets approached as a traditional, plot-hook-laden campaign. They're not aware of more "modern" GM techniques, and so their approaches tend to lead into the same style of gameplay.
To my credit, I find that as a GM I'm generally quite good at running an improvisational style of game, and so when I notice one of our other GMs getting caught up in minutiae around trying to extrapolate things that contradict their prep/notes, it can feel . . . exasperating, I suppose, especially since my train of thought is to not treat game notes as exactly "precious" to begin with.
My biggest drawback as a player is probably that I'm so totally over combat in the game. For 3 or 4 years now, combat is consistently the part of the game I am least interested in at every level. As a player, if a combat takes longer than 30 minutes total to resolve, it begins to feel like a waste of time.
But the other players in our group tend to relish combat, so I don't know how to reconcile that as a GM.
I'm actually gearing up to GM an Edge of the Empire campaign in January, so this is an interesting thought exercise as I'm getting back into the swing of things.