You need to quantify what you consider "good enough" in order to answer that.
First, in strict terms of bandwidth, no, today's best wireless just can't compete with today's best fiber. But how about tomorrow? No, tomorrow's best wireless still won't beat tomorrow's best fiber; but, with wireless, when 7G hits the scene everyone goes out and buys a new $50 modem and trucks don't need to physically roll to every end point on the network to upgrade their tubes.
Second, in more relaxed terms of bandwidth, when do we reach "enough" so that even revolutionary improvements don't really matter any more? Do I really need the ability to download a full 4k movie in under six seconds? I don't mean that as a "640k should be enough for anyone" argument, but at a point in time, yes, 640k did count as "enough" for most purposes, even though at that same point in time we had supercomputers with a whopping 16MB of main RAM.
Finally, and most importantly (I touched this in my first point), you asked specifically about "to the home". The biggest challenge in getting bits to the vast majority of homes has nothing to do with the throughput of the medium, but whether we can get it to the home in the first place. In the nearest city to me, I could get 1GB connections for a few hundred a month; living half an hour away, I don't even have the slowest of DSL available at any price. Whether or not fiber counts as "better" in that context doesn't mean a damned thing to me, because I won't ever see it.
When you ask about "good enough", keep in mind that the connection that meets all you needs, the connection that you can get, beats the much, much better one that you can't get.