AVIF vs WebP: Which Image Format is Better in 2025?

In the world of modern image formats, AVIF and WebP are the two leading contenders for replacing JPEG on the web. Both offer significant improvements over legacy formats, but they have different strengths, weaknesses, and ideal use cases.

In this comprehensive comparison, we'll analyze both formats across multiple dimensions—compression efficiency, image quality, browser support, encoding speed, and practical applications—to help you make an informed decision for your projects.

Quick Comparison: AVIF vs WebP

Origins and Development

WebP: The Pioneer (2010)

WebP was developed by Google and released in 2010. It's based on the VP8 video codec (later VP9), which Google acquired when they purchased On2 Technologies.

WebP was designed as a direct replacement for JPEG, PNG, and GIF, offering better compression while maintaining similar quality. It gained mainstream adoption in 2020 when Safari finally added support.

AVIF: The Newcomer (2019)

AVIF was developed by the Alliance for Open Media and released in 2019. It's based on the AV1 video codec, created as a royalty-free alternative to HEVC (H.265).

AVIF benefits from nearly a decade of compression research since WebP's introduction. The Alliance for Open Media includes Google, Apple, Microsoft, Mozilla, Netflix, and Amazon—ensuring broad industry support.

Compression Efficiency

This is where AVIF truly shines. Multiple independent studies confirm AVIF's compression advantage:

Real-World Compression Results

According to Netflix's research and independent benchmarks:

• AVIF vs JPEG: 30-50% smaller at equivalent quality
• WebP vs JPEG: 25-35% smaller at equivalent quality
• AVIF vs WebP: 20-30% smaller at equivalent quality

For a typical 1920×1080 photograph:

The compression advantage is most pronounced for photographic content with complex details, gradients, and subtle color variations.

Image Quality Comparison

Visual Quality at Equal File Sizes

When comparing at the same file size, AVIF consistently delivers better visual quality:

• Gradients: AVIF handles gradients more smoothly with less banding
• Fine Details: AVIF preserves more texture and fine detail in complex images
• Color Accuracy: AVIF maintains better color fidelity, especially in shadows and highlights
• Sharp Edges: WebP can produce more artifacts around text and sharp edges
• Low Bitrate: AVIF degrades more gracefully at extreme compression levels

Color Depth and HDR

A significant technical advantage of AVIF is its support for higher color depths:

For professional photography, HDR content, or displays with wide color gamut support (like Apple's ProMotion displays), AVIF is the clear winner.

Browser Support (2025)

According to Can I Use, both formats now have excellent browser support:

Global Support: WebP has ~96-97% support, while AVIF has ~93-95% support. The gap is narrowing as older iOS devices are phased out.

For more details, see our Browser Support for AVIF in 2025 article.

Performance: Encoding and Decoding

Encoding Speed

WebP has a significant advantage in encoding speed:

• AVIF encoding is typically 2-5x slower than WebP
• For real-time or high-volume processing, WebP is more practical
• AVIF encoding speed is improving with hardware acceleration and optimized encoders
• For pre-generated assets, encoding time is less critical

Decoding Speed

Decoding speed affects how quickly images display in browsers:

• WebP decoding is generally faster than AVIF
• AVIF decoding can be more CPU-intensive on older devices
• The smaller file size of AVIF often compensates for slower decoding (less data to download)
• Modern devices handle both formats without noticeable performance differences

When to Use Each Format

Choose AVIF When:

• Maximum compression is your top priority
• You're serving high-quality photographic content
• Your content benefits from HDR or wide color gamut
• Your audience uses modern browsers (2020+)
• You're implementing a multi-format strategy with fallbacks
• Encoding time isn't critical (pre-generated assets)

Choose WebP When:

• You need maximum browser compatibility
• Encoding speed is important (real-time processing)
• You're working with simpler graphics where AVIF's advantage is smaller
• You need simpler workflow integration
• You're targeting lower-powered devices

Best Practice: Use Both

The optimal strategy is to serve both formats with appropriate fallbacks:

<picture>
  <!-- Best compression for modern browsers -->
  <source type="image/avif" srcset="image.avif">

  <!-- Good compression for slightly older browsers -->
  <source type="image/webp" srcset="image.webp">

  <!-- Universal fallback -->
  <img src="image.jpg" alt="Description" width="800" height="600" loading="lazy">
</picture>

This approach ensures every user gets the best possible experience their browser can support.

Real-World Case Studies

E-commerce Platform

A major e-commerce site with thousands of product images implemented AVIF + WebP + JPEG:

• Total page weight reduced by 42%
• AVIF provided additional 18% reduction over WebP-only
• Page load times improved by 35%
• Mobile conversion rates increased by 7.5%

News Website

A high-traffic news site with many photographic images:

• Bandwidth reduced by 48%
• Largest Contentful Paint (LCP) improved by 28%
• CDN costs reduced by 32%

Tools and Implementation

Converting Between Formats

• Online: Use our AVIF2Anything converter or AVIF to WebP tool
• Command Line: libavif for AVIF, cwebp for WebP
• Node.js: Sharp supports both formats
• CDNs: Cloudinary, imgix, and others auto-convert based on browser

Future Outlook

Looking ahead:

• AVIF adoption continues growing as browser support becomes near-universal
• WebP remains relevant for its speed and compatibility advantages
• AVIF encoding is getting faster with hardware acceleration
• JPEG XL is emerging but lacks browser support
• The best strategy remains serving multiple formats with fallbacks

Conclusion

Both AVIF and WebP represent significant improvements over legacy formats like JPEG and PNG. The choice between them depends on your priorities:

• For maximum compression and quality: AVIF wins with 20-30% smaller files
• For maximum compatibility and speed: WebP has broader support and faster encoding
• For the best overall results: Use both with JPEG fallback

As AVIF support reaches near-universal levels in 2025, it's increasingly becoming the preferred format for forward-thinking developers who prioritize performance and image quality.

Ready to try both formats? Use our free converter to convert your images, or check out:

• Convert AVIF to WebP
• Convert AVIF to JPG
• Convert AVIF to PNG