Actually, "fast" doesn't mean "performant" (OK, maybe that's not a word, in which case I mean "having high performance"), unless you want to also say "speed" means "performance".
Also "utilize" is more specific than "use": it implies "using for a desirable purpose". Consider:
(1) This daemon process is utilizing all the available bandwidth.
(2) This daemon process is using all the available bandwidth.
Sometimes people making up new words do come across as lazy, but you can easily go too far in the other direction, too.
(1) The bandwidth is being entirely consumed. It is all needed and the process is performing nominally.
(2) The bandwidth is being entirely consumed, but it might only be because the process is misbehaving and consuming more bandwidth than necessary.
Speed only translates to performance if the resource being quickly consumed is actually needed. Example-- a game might always use all CPU cycles, but only when rendering the most challenging scene is reaching peak performance.
Is that difference how people would actually understand the word? I've never (knowingly) heard it used like that. Certainly terms like "CPU utilization" and "network utilization" are frequently used to denote a simple use-divided-by-capacity ratio.
For your game example, I don't see what isn't encompassed by "speed" (how many FPS you get out) or "efficiency" (how much CPU/GPU you use to do it).