Everyone has different use cases and needs from their watch which is absolutely fine and why Apple makes a wide range of products to cater for everyone. I am always curious when people cite the shared (and now aging) processor as a reason to be disappointed with the Ultra however.
I guess to my mind the only reason the processor should ever be an issue is if people can point to certain things it struggles to do at the pace they would expect. My Ultra is as snappy as I need it to be, just as my previous Series 5 was quick and responsive when using the same processor. I haven't seen anyone make a compelling case for what a faster processor would add to their Ultra experience.
That said, I think it might cause an issue for Apple with the line going forward. We are not party to Apple's upgrade plans for the Ultra, however it would not be a surprise if, as more of a niche product, the upgrade cycle was two-yearly rather than every year. At some point (and probably sooner rather than later) there will be a chip upgrade in the main AW line and this will oblige Apple to make it coincide with an Ultra upgrade. There's no way from a marketing and positioning angle that they can have their premium watch running a slower chip than its cheaper and supposedly inferior siblings, even if in day-to-day terms no-one notices the performance difference anyway.