The CAP theorem is actually a bit misleading. The fact that you have a CA design is nonsense, because when a section arises, you definitely have a problem of consistency (for example, the problem of data synchronization) or accessibility (latency). That is why there is a more accurate theorem that:
During partitioning in a distributed system, you must choose between consistency and accessibility .
In practice, this is not so simple. It should be noted that the choice between consistency and accessibility is not binary. You may even have some degree of both. For example, with regard to ACID, you may have atomic and long-lived transactions with NoSQL, but lack the degree of isolation and consistency for better accessibility. Availability can then be assimilated for latency, because your response time will depend on several factors (is the nearest server available?).
So, to answer your question, this is usually marketing nonsense. You need to actually scratch the surface to see what exactly such a solution is gaining and losing.
If you want deeper explanations, you can look here , here or.