Map Tile files size 256 vs. 512 and how to lower http requests


Because of the requests costs (AWS cloudfront charges requests), I would like to know is there any way to lower the requests of map PNG tile files?

I know I can do something by limiting the zoom leves, setting cache-control, and setting bound limits, but what about the size of the png file?

Currently I have 256x256 sized PNG files, how does the 512x512 differ from them?
Does it mean that if I server larger tile files, there is less requests?

When I read the Maperitive instructions:
"resolution: the rate of tile resolution (integer value >= 1; the default value 1 means standard resolution - 256x256 pixels). If you, for example, set it to 2, tiles will have 512x512 pixels, but will cover the same map area - this is useful for generating tiles for Retina displays.

I understand that the phrase “will cover the same map are” says that actually with 512px sized tiles there is same amount of server requests as with 256px ? Is it really so and why?

512px tiles are typically used to cater for very high resolution displays, so yes, the number of tile requests would be the same (because each tile covers the same area of the planet as a 256px tile), and each tile would be larger (in bytes) because it has four times as many pixels.

I think there are some discussions somewhere regarding AWS costs for tile serving. IIRC the conclusion was that the pricing model counter-indicated such usage. You’ll have to search to find the discussions, but alternatives would have been mentioned.