It is more the opposite at this point. When Ukraine did not capitulate and also regained some large portions of territory, Russia pivoted to conducting an attrition war. The effectiveness of drones and the difficulty of hiding massed forces in preparation of large attacks, made this the most sensible approach. As well, Russia has a large in place production base for the more mundane types of weaponry to conduct such a war. Fairly dumb bombs, artillery and such. Also a larger population to recruit from.
At this time Russia has far more reserves near the front that have not yet been involved as units in active combat. Front line troops can rotate through these reserves. And also rotate out and be replaced. Russia has much more materiel of almost every type.
Russia also has the luxury of retreat. If you are fighting an attrition war, retreat is a good tactic. Ukraine is fighting on its territory. Retreat is much harder to do on an emotional and political level.
Ukraine has lost far more personnel than is admitted. Although the higher figures are reported now and then. Western support in materiel is thinning due to the long lead times and higher complexity and cost of most western weapons. The western system of production is profit orientated while the Russian system is authoritatively directed. They may not make the slickest weapons, but they make a lot of weapons.
An attrition war reaches a tipping point. The target of it is whittled down to the point where the conductor of it can now make large decisive advances which lead to total military defeat. Or they surrender without the large advances needed. Or, the conductor cannot support the attrition war over time, due to politics or supply. A frozen conflict while both sides try and rebuild. Or one or both sides are picked off by other players.
Right now it seems Russia can continue this attrition for several more years. I feel Ukraine cannot resist that long. Maybe one more year.
They are on the back foot. Not getting enough support to survive much longer.