I am amazed that so many posters here are trying to recommend to the OP to keep the 5D3 which is so much more expensive and way in excess of his needs. Too many users in this forum are gear heads. The gentleman stated that he couldn't tell the difference with his test shots. He knows enough about photography to understand the impact of lighting and lenses on the results. And I am sure he understand the differences with features etc. His main concern was IQ! Yet he was expecting something different - its a real eyeopener if you ask me. We assume that everyone has the desire to pixel peep and find the most discernible difference while forgetting that photography is an art and a pastime not something to keep our wallets empty. I say to the OP to SEND BACK THE 5D3 and stick with what works for a little money and go from there. Later down the road if you want the performance or 61 focus points etc you could buy the 5DMk4 or something better. In the end i think this guy knows something that us gearheads dont!
Oh bollocks. Nobody is assuming anything rather expressing why he may not have seen much difference in image quality in his test shots and the comments are bang on. The OP said he's a pensioner but didn't get caught up in cost and, afterall, he is in a position to order two new bodies to try out and says he will buy more lenses. It seems perhaps that image quality is his primary concern rather than cost and in that context he should keep the 5D3 or as another comment suggested, return both and get a 6D.
There are many aspects to image quality and most are not about pixel peeping or editing. Noise is a biggie and in the well-lit daytime conditions that the OP did the test shots there will be very little noise in any image even from an iPhone. Images at dusk, dawn, night, or indoors will be a different story. Or images with deep shadow regions.