This would be nearly 4X that.
This new optical standard is only about 50% faster than the now-ancient copper SATA standard of 6Gbps. It has stuff-all reserve for future development!
Every time we have one of these new standards, Wi-Fi whatever, they are just a bit above the previous standard and never at the limits of the tech. There is never enough reserve to give them decent longevity. It's as if those manufacturers involved in setting standards were making a standard that would be quickly obsolescent—that is, they'd guarantee ongoing production/sales without much effort.
It's been such a consistent problem for so long that it has shades of the Phoebus cartel about it. As always, the user ends up paying more because of premature (planned) obsolescence.
The link sp332 has provided says it all, reckon it supports my case.
So the WiFi becomes the transport layer in the OSI model. It's the throughput data rate that matters not what type of device that's connected at either end of the link.
you are surprised that free-space optical transfer over many(?) meters is "only" 50% faster than data transfer over <1m carefully constructed differential coax-pairs?
Which wasn't what the general public thinks it is and, much like equating short-run in-device transports with lossy, room-distance ones, is a good signal that one is comparing apples and trailer trucks.
"common household LED light bulbs" is pretty ridiculous." Likely so, but all we have to do for 9GB/s is to use the transmitters and receivers used in standard commercial fiber optics (or a suitable adaptation thereof) and we'd romp home.
It is the same for every new technology. It was the same with 4G, 5G.
In DE mobile operators do not offer HSPA at the same time with 4G so you cannot compare how crap the 4G is.