They're really completely different product categories and shouldn't even be compared.

It seems like it's a lot more complicated than "LEO vs GEO" and they are very much worth comparing.

You have LEO stuff like Iridium that is targeted at pocket-sized terminals at very low bandwidth

You have GEO stuff like Sky Muster with large, fixed dishes, high latency and decent bandwidth

Then you have Starlink with large, fixed dishes, low latency and high bandwidth

How so? Starlink seems extremely competitive in bandwidth and terminal size with Ka and Ku band GEOs, while blowing them out of the water when it comes to latency.

I'm curious to understand if and when inter-satellite links can reduce the latency of a starlink connection

bandwidth per dollar is what matters, and Leo is not as good as geo in that regard. if you threw the same amount of money SpaceX is putting into starlink into a viasat-3 you'd have more bandwidth and better coverage.