In the case of mint and transfer of NFT, which protocol is gas-efficient? I am not sure but expect that ERC1155 requires more identifiers than ERC721. Please correct me.

1 Answer 1


In general the answer is no. ERC721 is not more gas efficient for minting NFTs. However, you can put whatever you like in the mint function so this will not always hold true.

If by "identifiers" you mean state storage for tracking then no ERC1155 also doesn't require more "identifiers".

I wrote about this in depth in this stack overflow question.

If you do a simple test using the code in linked question. You will see that

  • Minting with an ERC721 costs 96,073 gas
  • Minting with an ERC1155 costs 51,935 gas

Hope this helps

  • I thought ERC1155 requires additional identifier to define the type of the token(FT or NFT). Since this identifier is unnecessary in ERC721 so ERC721 is more gas-efficient. But you are saying it is NOT. I am pretty confused now..
    – lagoiz
    Nov 26, 2021 at 12:55
  • 1
    Actually there is no special identifier for the difference between fungible and non fungible. There is simply a number to define how many copies of a token You want. If you choose to mint 1 copy of a token then you have a non fungible token. If you mint 10 copies of a token you have a fungible token. Nov 27, 2021 at 15:25
  • Well noted. Then, is the fungibility of tokens minted in erc1155 determined only by the minting amount?
    – lagoiz
    Nov 28, 2021 at 11:59
  • 1
    Yes, minting amount changes fungibility Nov 30, 2021 at 21:54
  • If someone has 1 token minted based on ERC1155, how can I distinguish it btw NFT and FT without any related identifiers?
    – lagoiz
    Dec 3, 2021 at 11:45

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.