It's good too always bear this in mind when asking this question: Sophie's choice is a thought experiment. Meaning that the perfect conditions where a parent has to choose one child to live based on their personal preference, don't exist. If both kids are in danger of being hit by a bus, the parent will grab both of them. Or if the parent has only one arm, they will grab the one who's more in danger, or even get themselves in the way to save both kids.
In less dramatic circumstances, the parent might choose to give more money to kid 1 because they think they need it more, or because they think they will manage it better. It doesn't mean they love kid 1 more than kid 2.
I'm a parent. I have infinite love for both of my kids. Love doesn't play favourites or get into mind games. I love them differently because they are two different people. Treating them exactly the same would lead to unfairness, because their needs are not exactly the same. That applies to the 'who do I save?' scenario too, because invariably, one of them will be in more danger/be more possible to save than the other one in that moment.

I'd hope they'd never have to face the problem but if they did I'd try my best to accept whatever they do cuz it's horrible thing to have to choose, tho ofc it would suck and hurt if I'd be abandoned but still

Who would you want them to save first?

As I don't know your parents I can just project from myself: Whoever would be the physically closer one at that precise moment.

I can't imagine a situation where this could be a rational decision unless one of you fucked them over in a way I can't even begin to fathom.

This is so deep monked brain territory that it really comes down to pure instinct and that is driven by perceived higher chance.

If the situation is in a way there it's impossible (for example would have to carry both of you but you're too heavy) chances would be high that we'd all die together - not because of some heroism bullshit but simply because I know my inner monkey quite well and it's self preservation instinct vs kin preservation are ... Let's say not in my favor ad an individual :D

There's only one way to find out, take a trip with the whole family to Niagara Falls or Yellowstone.

Probably whoever is in gravest danger or, if the danger is percieved as equal, who physically closest to them at the time.

If one of you are able to save themselves they would save the other. If neither could save themselves they wouldn't run past one of you to look for the other but get the first one they see out first.

I don't think trying to figure out favourites like this is worth thinking about, past the sbive point. If you dwell on thoughts like this beyond a slight curiosity it might just be your mind trying to come up with different ways to hurt you and make you suffer emotionally. Don't let it.

You should watch the movie "Sophie's Favourite". /s

This was a plot point in Superman and Lois, and Lois had a very good explanation for her choice: Your brother doesn't have powers. I trusted you to look after yourself where he couldn't.