Which is more efficient and requires less power?

Hard to say really. You would need to know the impedance graph ("nominal" values are just about worthless) along with the phase graph to make an accurate guess.

Also, in some cases, published sensitivity specs are far from the true value.

But assuming your numbers are hypothetical and the phase angles are similar for both, #1 would require a little less power than #2.

Arthur

Also depends on the crossover. 1st order, 4th order? More crossover parts make it harder for low power amps to drive.
But based on the info given, I agree with Aball. See what the lowest imedance is on the speakers. If one drops to 2ohms, it will be a challenge to drive.
Speaker Sensitivity

Assuming the numbers given are accurate, the 94 dB-watt 4 ohm nominal speaker is 5 dB more efficient than the 89 dB-watt 6 ohm speaker. In this case, the 4 ohm speaker will also have a higher 2.83 volt sensitivity, at 97 dB for a 2.83 volt input vs roughly 90.5 dB for a 2.83 volt input for the 6 ohm nominal speaker.

I have heard that the convention is to quote a "nominal impedance" value roughly 1.25 times the minimum impedance, rounded to the nearest ohm. There's no guarantee that a given manufacturer follows this convention, though.

Note that a few amplifiers might still be happier with the lower efficiency 6 ohm speaker.

Duke

Thanks guys. I suspected the answer would not be easy.

Duke notes

the convention is to quote a "nominal impedance" value roughly 1.25 times the minimum impedance

Many manufacturers quote the impedance @ 1kHz instead. Not so illuminating (but things are getting better).
On topic -- No1 spkr of course, as all above note.