Skip to content

ResearchPricing and accessModels

Study: The same text costs far more tokens in some languages than in English across AI models

A CLEAR study finds the costliest language can need up to 17 times the tokens of the cheapest. Its published data puts Turkish at 1.3 to 2 times English.

Story date On the site Türkçe

3 sourcesJump to sources

Sources: Rest of World, CLEAR, GitHub

In this story
  1. Sources3
  2. About this story
  3. On the same topic3

Using AI in languages other than English can cost more, Rest of World reported on October 26. The report is based on “The Tokenizer Tax,” a study the Coalition for Language Equity in AI Research (CLEAR) published on September 29. Models split text into chunks called tokens, and providers charge per token regardless of language. Languages with less digital data get split into smaller fragments, which raises the token count. The researchers call this gap a “tokenizer tax.” More tokens also mean higher latency and less effective room in the context window.

CLEAR tokenized FLORES-200, a set of sentences professionally translated into about 200 languages, with tokenizers from every major lab. Its headline metric is how many times more tokens the costliest language needs than the cheapest. For the 20 languages most common on the web, the ratio sits between 1.5x and 3.1x with one exception. Across all FLORES-200 languages it ranges from 2.7x for the most equitable tokenizer to 17x in the worst case. Under CLEAR’s grading, no general-purpose frontier model earns better than a B. Google’s Gemini and Gemma family gets a B at 5.1x, Anthropic’s Claude Fable 5 and Opus 4.8 a D at 9.3x, and OpenAI’s GPT-5 an F at 13.8x. The hardest-hit languages use rarely seen scripts, such as Burmese, Tibetan, Khmer and Lao.

Turkish isn’t discussed in the study’s write-up, but it is part of FLORES-200. Per the raw counts CLEAR published on GitHub, the same Turkish text takes roughly 1.3 to 2 times as many tokens as English, depending on the model. The ratio is 1.30 for Llama 4 Scout, 1.34 for Gemini and Gemma, 1.42 for GPT-5, 1.69 for Claude Fable 5 and 2.02 for DeepSeek V4.1 Flash. These ratios aren’t stated in the study; they were calculated from its published counts. CLEAR asks labs to report such ratios in model cards and to move to character- or language-normalized pricing. Dheemanth Reddy, CEO of Maya Research, told Rest of World that falling token prices will ease the cost impact, but that fixing the gap requires better tokenizer design.

Sources

3 sources
  1. Rest of World (Ananya Bhattacharya)“AI models cost more when you don’t use English”Report with industry comments · restofworld.org
  2. CLEAR“The Tokenizer Tax”Study: method, model table, grades, recommendations · clear-languages.org
  3. GitHub (clear-coalition-ai/token-cost-equity)“Token Cost Equity”Code and raw per-language token counts (source of the Turkish ratios)github.com

About this story

Written by
· JARRUS
Story date
On the site
since Oct. 27, 2026
Report an error
Spotted an error in this story? [email protected] · Instagram

On the same topic

  1. 5 sources

    Google unveils Gemini 4 Carbon, its most powerful model

  2. 4 sources

    Anthropic’s unreleased Claude model built working exploit chains for five major platforms

  3. 3 sources

    Axiom used AI agents to verify the longest proof in math history, the classification of finite simple groups, in Lean