On an individual basis no, there isn't a difference. It's prejudice regardless of what group you're insulting. But in the context of a country like America where white people generally have the advantage (in many ways) over non-white and blacks specifically, the impact of a white person insulting (or attacking) a black person and a black person insulting (or attacking) a white person are not necessarily going to be equal. The legal system, for instance, tends to give harsher punishments to black defendants compared to white defendants who are convicted of the same crimes.
Given the specific things the attackers said here it will be all but impossible for them to argue in court that there was not a racial element. There's not usually direct quotes from attackers so the motivations have to be inferred elsewhere. This is why I'm worried about the long-term ramifications of this, that it will be seen as the "normal" mindset of black people so that any time a black person commits a crime in the future and there is a white victim it will be viewed as a specifically racially based attack (or theft, or whatever). Specifically I worry that people in law enforcement/the legal system/government will have this view and it will bias their judgment, leading to disproportionate punishments. I don't worry so much about that happening in cases of white people committing crimes against black people though because law enforcement/the legal system/government is majority white in almost every case and they won't assume a racial prejudice by default when it comes to white criminals (because then they'd have to assume that they, too, have prejudice inside them).
So, like, the difference is one of an individual level versus a systemic level. It's equally bad to insult or attack someone based on race (regardless of the races involved) but the system will treat them differently.
