I wonder what bit of misinformation makes people think that simply because a link is fast that it won't be congested. This isn't the caseĀ and fast links tend to be major traffic aggregation points where fairness is a bigger issue, and where insufficient buffering can result in very costly under-utilization.
As I mentioned, in the sort of place where you're using a purely software forwarding path and where the design of CHOKe wouldn't be a performance impediment you could also do per-flow queuing which would be considerably more fair than CHOKe (and potentially much better for loss sensitive flows), perhaps falling back to CHOKe/SFB if the flow lookups become too expensive.
AFAIK, Linux doesn't even have a true per-flow qdisc though there have been patches and SFQ approximates it with acceptable performance. Can you suggest a case where CHOKe would be needed but the SFQ qdisc in Linux would be inappropriate?