Agreed re time/memory tradeoff. It's pretty solid in that regard as far as I was able to tell.
And exactly re Pascal, and if you believe the rumors, the 2015 edition of Intel's Haswell. It's tricky stuff. It could be exactly the trick for the cryptonotes in the long run, but it still won't *eliminate* the latency / bandwidth limits to DRAM, just improve them a lot.
I'm pretty comfortable with both cryptonight (XMR) and wild keccak (BBR). The GPU result on them both has played out about as expected, and barring cryptographic attacks that're beyond my level of sophistication, they should do about the same ASIC-wise -- some advantage, but not monstrous, to the point where I hesitate to guess whether or not it would be cost-effective to design one unless the scale became bitcoin-size.
Thanks for answer, I definitely feel more comfortable with cryptonote than with scrypt, x11 etc
My point is, does BBR have an advantage about blockchain size? If so, what is the advantage. Communicate this. If XMR blockchain size is a trainwreck waiting to happen, then people will seek alternatives. If it isnt, then BBR has no big advantage over XMR
It does- see http://boolberry.org/files/Boolberry_Reduces_Blockchain_Bloat.pdf
XMR blockchain size is not quite a trainwreck waiting to happen, all of these cryptonote coins will have some scaling issues due to their nature.
XMR have fixed some issues early on reducing bloat from pools, but it's designed in a different manner to boolberry that doesn't allow them to do what BBR is doing, they are moving to embedded db instead
There are other things to consider too, personally I think XMR emission is more poorly thought out, unfairly rewarding early users too much. Of course for now early adopters will be happy for this but I think that can bite them in the foot a little later.