This is all theoretical obviously and the efficacy of this depends on network usage and adoption.
Assume an average tx size of 470 bytes for BTC and BCH.
Right now, BTC (assuming a 1.4 MB block) can do 2478 tx per block which is 4.99 TPS.
BCH can do 17021 (on an 8 MB block) and has a TPS of 28.
If bloXroute, a layer 0 scalability solution is integrated at the same scale, it will reduce tx size by 100x (470 bytes to 4.7 bytes) by assigning ID's to each block and storing the information on a seperate trustless relayer system.
In this case, BTC (1.4 MB block) will do almost 297,000 tx per block and 496 TPS.
At an 8 MB block, BCH will do 1.702 million transaction per block which is 2836 TPS.
Here's the kicker,
On a 32 MB block, BCH does a whopping 6.808 million tx per block and 11,347 TPS.
Now I know a lot of people do not agree with bloXroutes solution. But it isn't meant to add any extra security to the network, it is solely meant to increase scalability. By using the shorter ID's and storing block information that is verified on a separate relay system, it makes going back to find information much more difficult, but IMO doesn't impede on security. Security is still wholly dependent on Layer 1. For this reason, if a malicious transactions makes it way through the network, bloXroute will accept it too. But the scalability benefits are immense with such software
I'd appreciate any input/opinions on bloXroute and it's implementation. Or if you feel any of my assumptions or conclusions are wayward as well.
This is just super exciting to think about. Layer 0 solutions like this are much more feasible than Layer 2 protocols like LN IMHO.