ground <--> satellite <--> ground

    ground <--> satellite <--> satellite <--> ground

Edit: Thanks for all the responses. I'd been assuming it was a test of Starlink latency only, but if it's Starlink -> ground station -> open internet -> ISP then it would make sense how that would be slower than a pure Starlink connection.

ground <--> satellite <--> ground <------------> ground

With satellite links:

ground <--> satellite <--> satellite <--> ground

i.e. the sat-to-sat link should be faster than the ground-to-ground link, on the basis that light transmitted in vacuum goes faster than light transmitted in glass. That's the theory at least.

Currently:

  ground <--> satellite <--> ground <--> ground farther away via legacy infrastructure

  ground <--> satellite <--> satellite <--> ground farther away directly

Low altitude orbits mean that the hops up and down can be compensated by faster hops across.

That all of course is not there yet and depends on Starlink implementing the cross sattelite links.

1. Hop count is not one on the ground to go same distance.

2. Speed of light is significantly faster in vacuum.

3. The path is potentially straighter for longer distances.

Judging from their high launch cadence, it seems satellite-satellite communication was just a means to excite the fanboys and motivate their employees, the same way the peddle the Mars stuff.