Platelet counts were performed in 50 cats presented for diagnostic investigation. For each cat, counts were obtained using a manual haemocytometer method and compared with counts obtained by estimation from a stained blood smear, a QBC VetAutoread analyser, a Zynocyte VS/2000 analyser, impedance automated counts on a Baker System using both EDTA and citrated anticoagulated blood, and use of a Zynostain modified counting chamber kit. None of the methods gave high correlation with the haemocytometer counts. The blood smear estimation of platelet counts had the highest correlation (r = 0–776) and was the only method to have reasonable values for both sensitivity and specificity. With the impedance automated counts, citrated anticoagulated blood had marginally higher correlation than EDTA anticoagulated blood, and the time between blood sampling and platelet count determination had no effect on the count obtained. When in-house analyser or impedance automated platelet counts are abnormal or not consistent with clinical findings, the authors recommend that a manual platelet count using either haemocytometry or examination of a blood smear is performed.