I received the statement claiming that "Monte Carlo is normally not accurate enough in a Local Volatility context to be a reliable validation tool for the desired accuracies in Finite Difference. (The other way around is Ok, though: Verifying Monte Carlo by Finite Difference)".
Nowadays, we developed other method such as Finite Difference to fast forward the computation (given MC is slow with million paths). I still personally think that MC is a good method that evades the curse of dimensionality to provide a good ballpark pseudo-truth - upon convergence, and MC should be used for validation against , for example, Finite Difference before rolling it out. It should not be on the opposite side like it is claimed by the statement above.
However, I might be wrong.
Appreciate expertise here to give some comments/thoughts.