I just speed tested my Starlink connection at 93 Mpbs down, 9.3 Mpbs up. That's slower than usual but better than 10x the speed I was getting from a rural telco, and it has been more reliable too, for about the same price.

What am I missing out on from a faster connection?

I get 1gbps up/down for ~$74/month. So Starlink is 1.7x for much less speed.

The only way Starlink looks attractive to me is if living off the grid and its the only option. By the time I'm no longer paying for utilities, the increased for less performance will not be as expensive. That's not happening any time soon

I looked at the Starlink website and it looks like residential service is $120/mo. I pay less than that ($110/mo) for 1 Gbps down and 40 Mbps up from Comcast. They also give me a public v4 IP, not CGNAT like Starlink. My service is quite reliable (I would say I have a few hours' downtime once every year or two), so that part is a wash. The one advantage Starlink has is they offer a /56 to IPv6 customers, not just a /60 that Comcast does.

Obviously it varies significantly based on where you are. Different ISPs are different, and even the same provider might be good in one region and bad in another. But for me at least, Starlink would be a terrible choice. They are worse in most every way (sometimes significantly so), and only better in one way.