Server load compared to gallery size

[Hercules25]

Before I hosted my site on a shared hosting account.
After a while my gallery slowly grew and contained 45,000 photos.
My host kicked me out because they claimed I was lagging their server to much.
I moved to a VPS (512MB) and things went on fine.
As a precaution I started a new gallery after 4 years and allmost 50K photos thinking I would improve the server load.
Gallery only gets into trouble now on days with 100K+ pageviews so I'm looking for 1 new server with 4GB memory and a faster CPU.
I'm also thinking of hiring somebody that can merge my 2 galleries so there will be only one (updating multiple galleries everytime sucks).
My question: if a gallery of 50,000 photos generates a theoretical server load of 100, will a gallery of 100,000 pics generate a server load of something like 120, 150, 200, 400 or 1,000?
Current galleries can be viewed here: http://www.kuikens.com/pictures/index.php & http://www.kuikens.com/photos/index.php (Yes I'll update to 1.5.20 soon)

[Αndré]

To be honest, I don't know. Of course database queries will be slower the more rows a table contain, but I never checked the actual load. To increase performance, please read http://documentation.coppermine-gallery.net/en/performance.htm

[Stramm]

What Do you mean with this numbers? 100, 120 150. All I can tell you: it depends
Not only on the number of pics but even more albums and categories. Also the number of users and the comment count may be of influence. If a server is at its max and it's starting to swap you can forget about it and need to find a better one. That new one may be loaded by maybe only 10-20%. That's what I've experienced with a 100k pic gallery.