It would have more TWR, the same efficiency, but the matter is almost irrelevant anyway.
(If you're trying to build a weapon, not a thruster, the laser is better because it is collimated in a narrow beam and the lamp isn't.)
Lasers are inefficient... and their inefficiency means they output heat. Which can only be disposed of in space by radiation. So if your radiator is at the focus of a much larger parabolic mirror sail, or even is just one-sided, you get photon thrust from the waste heat, same as the light bulb. However, the light bulb would be a lot lighter and simpler and cheaper.
However, the whole idea here is just... unbalanced. Photon thrusters really only make sense when you have antimatter fuel, a black hole reactor, or other highly speculative near-total-conversion reactor, in which case you are going to be directly converting matter into electromagnetic radiation, not generating electricity (Ineficient! Heavy!) and then turning that electricity into light.
(Converting any kind of heat source or other energy source, into a well-ordered "work" source such as torque on a shaft or electric current, inevitably has thermodynamic limits to its efficiency, unless it's already a well-ordered energy source, which few are. Often efficiency will be limited to less than 50 percent. If heat is what you want, you should just start with heat.)
If the thruster is being powered by beamed power from outside, you would do better with a simple solar sail. If you are powering it with any near-term (or even far-term) power source such as a fission or fusion reactor, you should at most be ejecting spent reactor fuel, and in most more likely designs, you will be ejecting a larger quantity of inert reaction mass accelerated with power from the reactor.