Skip to main content
Measured savings across 11 LLMs, from Claude Opus 4.7 to Gemini Flash.→ See per-model data
Connect your client
Research

Shortening LLM output cuts costs 1.5x, but trimming prompts backfires

A study of 9 models shows that prompting for concise output saves money while maintaining accuracy, but shortening input prompts causes models to write longer and costs more.

1 min read

Researchers tested whether instructing LLMs to be concise actually reduces costs across nine models including GPT-4o, Claude Sonnet, Qwen, DeepSeek-R1-Distill, Gemma, and Kimi. The findings reveal a counterintuitive split: asking a model to output concisely saves money and keeps accuracy intact, whi...

Sign in to read the full analysis

Free account. Full analysis on LLM unit economics, plus the weekly Cost-of-Inference column.

Try it on your own context

You just read the writeup. Now run the thing. Paste a doc or some verbose tool output and watch it shrink — free, no signup.

2,912/12,000 chars
Compressed
Compressed text will appear here…
Method & sources
Source type
Primary publication (lab/vendor blog) — our analysis + implication
Source link
r/machinelearning
Published
UTC
Byline
By the gotcontext.ai team (editorial standards)
Correction?
corrections@gotcontext.ai

Related