Why can YOU diverge from the compiler question when I can't? In this context, it's of absolutely no relevance what YOU do or what YOU use.
Please address the questions I posed, e.g. what is throughput? Why shouldn't one be concerned with code size?

You gave, was it 5, examples, of throughput issues and I repled with mine "crammed for speed". I would like to see a number of measures: mathematical throughput, string process throughput, logical throughput, but if any test of throughput is made that should give an indication.

No matter how little memory costs, the 805x can address up to 64KB of code. If it addresses more than 64KB, it's not an 805x.
It is truly amazing how little memory well crafted apps require. The bloated apps the PCcentric so called programmers produce is another story:
* we need a RTOS
* Ok, now 32k is not enoughj switch to 64
* for convenience we want to switch to the LARGE model
* oops now we exceed 64k
* OK add paging

If it doesn't plug into an i8052 socket, it's not an 805x at least for the sake of comparison.
No comment, If I give my opinion on that one, you will sock et to me :)

If the compiler generates 66KB of code, it's of no use.
I totally agree

True, it's POSSIBLE to page the code memory. I wouldn't expect the compiler to manage that
The compiler/linker (at least Keil) handles that very well I've been told.

Erik