There's no direct comparison.
Remember I asked this above:
What will you use these photos for? Will they be edited again?
Remember, Jpeg isn't a photo, it's a system of compression. It squashes data to make the smallest possible file size for the data that it can. Higher quality means less squashing. Lower quality means more.
But it's stll the same photo. - regardless of how much squashing has gone on.
But Jpeg is a lossy format. Everytime the file is compressed some data gets thrown away. Viewing doesn't cause recompression, but editing does.
So, in theory, you can start with a 10mb file and eventually end up with an empty file if you keep editing it.
But if the file is never going to be edited again, and if it looks good to you at 50kb or 500kb or 1mb then no problem.
So, the key questions are:
What will the photos be used for? If - say - only to be viewed on line - then the file size doesn't matter. It's just about what looks good to you.
If the file is going to be edited again, then file size is important, and the more the better.
Regards
TD