Wonder if it could also be a coprocessor, if the fabric has a limited cell count? Do your dsp work on the optimised chip and hand off the the expensive radio softdevice when your codesize is known to be large.
However, the examples indicate that if you have a loop that is executed over and over, the setup cost for configuring the fabric could be worth doing. Like a continuous audio stream in a wakeup-word detection, a hearing aid, or continous signals from an EEG.
Instead of running a general purpose cpu at 1MHz the fabric would be used to unroll the loop, you will use (up to) 100 building blocks for all individual operations. Instead of one instruction after another, you have a pipeline that can execute one operation in each cycle in each building block. The compute thus only needs to run at 1/100 clock, e. g. the 10kHz sampling rate of the incoming data. Each tick of the clock moves data through the pipeline, one step at a time.
I have no insights but can imagine how marketing thinks: "let's build a 10x10 grid of building blocks, if they are all used, the clock can be 1/100... Boom - claim up to 100x more efficient!" I hope their savings estimate is more elaborate though...
Increasing the processing power at that near-marginal power consumption broadens the range of battery-powered applications that are possible.
We're building an EEG headband with bone-conduction speaker so in order of power, our speaker/sounder and LEDs are orders of magnitude more expensive than our microcontroller.
In anything with a screen, that screen is going to suck all the juice, then your radios, etc. etc.
I'm sure there are very specific use-cases that a more energy efficient CPU will make a difference, but I struggle to think of anything that has a human interface where the CPU is the bottleneck, though I could be completely wrong.