AVIF vs WebP: Which Next-Gen Image Format Wins?

JPEG has been the default web image format for 30 years. It's finally being challenged by two next-generation formats: AVIF and WebP. Both deliver dramatically smaller files at equivalent visual quality, but they differ in compression efficiency, encoding speed, and browser support. This AVIF vs WebP breakdown covers what each format does well, where each falls short, and how to choose between them.

What Is WebP?

WebP was introduced by Google in 2010. It's based on the VP8 video codec and was designed specifically as a JPEG replacement. WebP supports both lossy and lossless compression, alpha transparency, and animation.

Key characteristics:

• Lossy compression roughly 25–35% smaller than JPEG at equivalent quality
• Lossless compression about 20% smaller than PNG
• Fast encoding — typically under a second per image
• Wide browser support — supported by Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari (since 14), and most mobile browsers

WebP is the safer, more mature choice. Tooling is widespread, encoding is quick, and every major browser now supports it.

What Is AVIF?

AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) arrived in 2019, built on the AV1 video codec. It's the newer format and pushes compression further than anything else widely available today.

Key characteristics:

• Lossy compression roughly 50% smaller than JPEG at equivalent quality — significantly better than WebP
• Supports lossless mode, alpha transparency, and animation
• Slower encoding — AVIF encoding is computationally expensive, often 5–10x slower than WebP
• 12-bit color depth and HDR support, which WebP lacks
• Growing browser support — Chrome, Firefox, and Opera support it; Safari added support in version 16

AVIF wins on file size and image quality, especially at low bitrates. The tradeoff is encoding time and slightly less universal support.

AVIF vs WebP: Compression Comparison

The chart below shows approximate file sizes for the same source image compressed at equivalent visual quality across three formats.

Same source photo, matched perceptual quality

As the chart shows, AVIF cuts the JPEG file size in half, while WebP saves about 30%. For a site serving thousands of images, that difference compounds quickly into meaningful bandwidth and storage savings.

Quality at Low Bitrates

Where AVIF really pulls ahead is at low bitrates. When you aggressively compress an image, WebP starts showing blocky artifacts and banding in gradients. AVIF degrades more gracefully — detail holds up longer and artifacts are less obvious.

This matters most for thumbnails, product image grids, and any context where you're serving many small images and want each one as tiny as possible. At high quality settings (above 80% equivalent), the visual difference between AVIF and WebP becomes hard to spot with the naked eye, and the file size gap narrows.

Encoding Speed

This is WebP's biggest advantage. Encoding a typical 1920×1080 photo to WebP takes under a second on modern hardware. The same image encoded to AVIF can take several seconds, sometimes longer at high effort settings.

For a CMS processing uploads in real time, WebP is the practical choice. For a build pipeline that pre-processes images offline, AVIF's encoding cost is manageable since you pay it once.

Browser Support

WebP has near-universal support as of 2024 — every major browser handles it. AVIF is close but not complete. Safari didn't add AVIF support until version 16 (macOS Ventura and iOS 16), so older Apple devices won't render AVIF images.

The standard mitigation is the <picture> element with fallback sources:

<picture>
  <source srcset="photo.avif" type="image/avif">
  <source srcset="photo.webp" type="image/webp">
  <img src="photo.jpg" alt="Description">
</picture>

This serves AVIF to browsers that support it, falls back to WebP, and finally to JPEG. It's the most robust approach if you can generate all three formats.

When to Use WebP

• Real-time encoding on uploads where speed matters
• Broad compatibility is a priority (older Safari users)
• Animated images — WebP animation support is more mature
• Most general web use where good-enough compression at fast speed wins

Convert your existing images with the PNG to WebP converter or go the other direction with WebP to PNG.

When to Use AVIF

• Maximum compression is the priority (large image-heavy sites)
• Build-time processing where encoding speed isn't critical
• HDR or wide-gamut content that needs 10+ bit color depth
• Future-proofing as browser support continues to grow

Practical Recommendation

For most websites today, serve both: AVIF as the primary source with a WebP fallback. This gives you AVIF's file size advantage where supported and WebP's compatibility everywhere else. If you can only pick one, WebP is the safer bet for now.

Either way, compress before you serve. The image compressor handles both formats and lets you compare file sizes side by side.

Related Reading

• Learn how to pair compression with correct dimensions in our email image resizing guide.
• Need to extract still frames? See our GIF to PNG conversion guide.
• Fix color issues before compressing with our image color correction guide.

For the full browser compatibility breakdown, Can I Use's AVIF support table tracks real-time adoption, and the WebP specification on developers.google.com covers technical details.