OpenAI vs Llama tokenizers: why the same text produces different token counts
A sentence that costs 50 tokens on GPT-5 might cost 55 tokens on Llama 4 or 48 on Claude. The differences come from the tokenizer's vocabulary, its merge rules, and how it handles whitespace, capitalization, and non-English text. Even among OpenAI models, GPT-5 (o200k_base) and GPT-4 (cl100k_base) use different tokenizers with different counts.
How this is calculated
OpenAI's o200k_base tokenizer has a larger vocabulary (200K tokens) than cl100k_base (100K tokens), which generally means fewer tokens for the same input because more common words and subwords are stored as single tokens. Llama's tokenizer is based on sentencepiece BPE with a 128K vocabulary and tends to be slightly less efficient for English but better for code and multilingual text. Anthropic doesn't publicly release its Claude tokenizer, so all Claude token counts are estimates. The practical impact is on API costs: at GPT-5 pricing, a 10% difference in tokenization efficiency can mean hundreds of dollars per month for high-volume applications.
Verdict
Token counts vary by model. For cost-critical applications, benchmark the actual token count with the target model's tokenizer. The built-in token counter on this page gives exact counts for OpenAI and Llama models and reasonable estimates for Claude and Gemini.
More Tokens scenarios
Frequently asked questions
What is a token in an LLM?
How accurate is this token counter?
Why do different models report different token counts?
Is my text sent to a server?
Related tools
LLM API Pricing Calculator
Compare API costs across major models (OpenAI, Anthropic, Google) with prompt caching.
Use tool ➜LLM VRAM Calculator
Calculate the VRAM needed to run or fine-tune any LLM at any quantization.
Use tool ➜JSON Formatter
Validate, format, and minify JSON data with syntax highlighting.
Use tool ➜