I’m not sure what percentage you mean by the vague word “countless”, but it is certainly not universal. In fact, when it comes to infants and the cognitively impaired most Christians would (I am guessing) concede that they are at least hopeful that in these cases P is not necessary for Q. Then there are those who look at Rom 1:20 and see a path for salvation for those who never hear the gospel, a path wherein one sees (or is caused to see) God’s attributes in creation. And then there are those as I suggested who have a strong view of God’s sovereignty and would say this scenario from the old CCC (from memory)
Tom and Bill (student missionaries) were on their way to the village but their car broke down. After repairs they arrived at the village a day late. They shared the gospel and many responded and added to the flock. They were happy. But on the way out a woman of the village told them: “thank you so much, I only wish that you were here yesterday so my father could have heard the gospel, but he died last night.” The missionaries were devastated. If they had been more diligent about the small things, like checking their vehicle ahead of time, the old man might have had a chance.
is (to some) instinctively nonsensical, as it paints God as sitting on his hands and saying: “Gee I’d have liked to save that man, but those two boys on a summer missions trip broke down, so there is nothing I can do.”
In short, there is a wide variety of views on soteriology. You are painting with too broad of a brush.