Best yield from table

Should you not also be taking into account width simultaneously ?

Based on sample file - perhaps:

I4:
=INDEX(F$4:F$7,MATCH(MIN(IF(($F$4:$F$7>=$C$4)*($G$4:$G$7>=$D$4),MOD($F$4:$F$7,$C$4)+MOD($G$4:$G$7,$D$4))),MOD($F$4:$F$7,$C$4)+MOD($G$4:$G$7,$D$4),0))
confirmed with CTRL + SHIFT + ENTER (enter alone will not suffice)

copy I4 to J4 for associated width

As you alter C4/D4 so the result should update accordingly (eg 600/300 returns 1250/350 whereas 600/400 returns 1050/550)

Originally Posted by sleazyfish

Width does need to be taken into account simultaneously. Is this possible?

It already is (I tried to illustrate that by means of examples and outputs)

I take that back - the above was not an accurate solution... is the below better ?

I4:
=INDEX(F$4:F$7,MATCH(MIN(IF(($F$4:$F$7>=$C$4)*($G$4:$G$7>=$D$4),MOD($F$4:$F$7,$C$4)*$D$4+MOD($G$4:$G$7,$D$4)*INT($F$4:$F$7/$C$4))),MOD($F$4:$F$7,$C$4)*$D$4+MOD($G$4:$G$7,$D$4)*INT($F$4:$F$7/$C$4),0))
confirmed with CTRL + SHIFT + ENTER and copied to J4

So waste is determined by: waste height * width + waste width * complete units (as determined by height)

Example:

250/175 would return 1250/350 rather than 500/230 given the former leaves no waste whatsoever