AVIF vs WebP: Next-Gen Image Formats Compared (2025)
AVIF achieves better compression than WebP but has slower encoding and wider software gaps. WebP is safer for production today. Here's the full comparison.
Advertisement
AVIF and WebP are both next-generation image formats designed to replace JPEG and PNG on the web. But they take different approaches. WebP (Google, 2010) prioritises broad compatibility and fast encoding. AVIF (Alliance for Open Media, 2019) prioritises maximum compression efficiency using technology derived from the AV1 video codec. Understanding the tradeoffs helps you make the right choice for your project.
Quick Answer
Use WebP for most production websites in 2025 — it has near-universal browser support and fast encoding. Use AVIF when you can tolerate slower build times and need maximum compression for high-traffic pages. Always provide a WebP or JPEG fallback for AVIF.
What Is AVIF?
AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) is an open, royalty-free image format derived from keyframes of the AV1 video codec. It was standardised by the Alliance for Open Media in 2019, with contributions from Google, Apple, Netflix, and Amazon. AVIF supports both lossy and lossless compression, HDR (High Dynamic Range), wide colour gamut (up to 12-bit per channel), and alpha transparency.
AVIF's compression is exceptionally good — typically 20–50% smaller than WebP at equivalent quality for photographic content. The downside is that AV1-derived encoding is computationally expensive. AVIF images can take 10–100× longer to encode than WebP, which matters for CMS image pipelines and build tools.
What Is WebP?
WebP was developed by Google from the VP8 video codec and released in 2010. It supports lossy and lossless compression, alpha transparency, and animation. It was the first widely-adopted next-gen format, replacing JPEG and PNG on Google's own products before browser support made it mainstream.
WebP encodes significantly faster than AVIF — usually within 2–5× of JPEG encoding speed. It has excellent browser support (96%+ globally) and is supported by all major image editing tools, CDNs, and CMS platforms.
AVIF vs WebP Comparison Table
AVIF vs WebP: key differences
| Feature | AVIF | WebP |
|---|---|---|
| Based on | AV1 video codec (2019) | VP8 video codec (2010) |
| Lossy compression vs WebP | 20–50% smaller | Baseline |
| Lossless compression vs PNG | ~20% smaller | ~26% smaller |
| Encoding speed | Slow (10–100× JPEG) | Fast (2–5× JPEG) |
| Decoding speed | Moderate | Fast |
| Transparency | Yes | Yes |
| Animation | Yes (AVIF sequences) | Yes |
| HDR / Wide colour | Yes (10–12-bit) | No (8-bit only) |
| Chrome support | Yes (85+, 2020) | Yes (32+, 2014) |
| Firefox support | Yes (93+, 2021) | Yes (65+, 2019) |
| Safari support | Yes (16+, 2022) | Yes (14+, 2020) |
| Edge support | Yes (90+, 2021) | Yes (18+, 2019) |
Advertisement
Compression Efficiency
AVIF consistently achieves better compression than WebP for photographic content. Independent testing by Jake Archibald (Google), Cloudinary, and Netflix shows AVIF is typically 20–50% smaller than WebP at matched SSIM quality scores. The gains are largest for complex photographic scenes; simpler graphics with flat colours see less improvement.
AVIF vs WebP file size at equivalent SSIM quality (photographic images)
| Image Type | WebP Size | AVIF Size | AVIF Savings |
|---|---|---|---|
| Portrait photo (1200×900) | 85 KB | 52 KB | 39% |
| Landscape photo (1920×1080) | 180 KB | 110 KB | 39% |
| E-commerce product (800×800) | 62 KB | 40 KB | 35% |
| Logo / flat graphic | 28 KB | 24 KB | 14% |
| Screenshot (UI, text heavy) | 115 KB | 90 KB | 22% |
Lossless trade-off
For lossless compression, WebP actually beats AVIF — WebP lossless is ~26% smaller than PNG, while AVIF lossless is only ~20% smaller. This means WebP is the better lossless choice for logos and screenshots.
Encoding and Decoding Speed
This is AVIF's biggest practical limitation. AVIF encoding (especially at high-quality settings) is dramatically slower than WebP or JPEG. A batch of 1,000 product images that takes 2 minutes to encode as WebP might take 20–30 minutes as AVIF. For static sites with pre-built assets this is acceptable; for on-the-fly image transformation it's a significant bottleneck.
Decoding (display in the browser) is fast for both formats on modern hardware. Mobile devices can render AVIF images quickly, though there's more CPU overhead than WebP on lower-end devices. As AV1 hardware decoding becomes standard in mobile chips, this gap is narrowing.
Compress and Convert Images Free
Our browser-based image compressor handles JPEG, PNG, and WebP. No upload required.
Browser and Software Support
WebP has had a head start of several years and is now supported by over 96% of browsers globally. AVIF support reached all major browsers by 2022 but has a shorter track record. Global AVIF support is approximately 90% as of 2024 — lower than WebP and with potential issues on older devices.
- Chrome 85+ (August 2020) — AVIF support
- Firefox 93+ (October 2021) — AVIF support
- Safari 16+ (September 2022) — AVIF support
- Edge 90+ (April 2021) — AVIF support
- Safari 14+ (September 2020) — WebP support (2 years earlier than AVIF)
Advertisement
HDR and Wide Colour
AVIF's most significant technical advantage over WebP is its support for HDR (High Dynamic Range) images and wide colour gamut. AVIF can store 10 or 12 bits per colour channel, enabling billions of colours and the full P3 and Rec. 2020 colour spaces. WebP is limited to standard 8-bit sRGB colour (16.7 million colours).
For most web content in 2025, this distinction doesn't matter — displays and content are still mostly sRGB. But for professional photography portfolios, product imagery on high-end displays, and future-proofing assets, AVIF's HDR and wide colour support is a genuine advantage.
When to Use AVIF
- High-traffic pages where maximum image size reduction justifies slower build times
- Professional photography portfolios using HDR or wide-colour content on modern displays
- Long-lived assets that will be served for years — AVIF support will only increase over time
- Video streaming platforms already using AV1, where AVIF fits naturally into the toolchain
- Always pair with a WebP or JPEG fallback via the <picture> element for ~10% of visitors without AVIF support
When to Use WebP
- Production websites where encoding speed matters — WebP builds are much faster than AVIF
- CMS platforms that auto-convert images (WordPress, Shopify) — WebP is the supported default
- Lossless graphics (logos, screenshots) — WebP lossless beats AVIF lossless in size
- Projects that need maximum browser compatibility without fallbacks
- When team image editing tools don't yet support AVIF export
Optimize Your Images for the Web
Compress and convert images to WebP with our free browser-based tool. No files uploaded.
Advertisement
Frequently Asked Questions
Is AVIF better than WebP?
For lossy photographic compression, AVIF produces 20–50% smaller files than WebP at equivalent quality. But WebP has faster encoding, better software support, and near-universal browser coverage. AVIF is technically superior; WebP is more practical for most projects in 2025.
Should I use AVIF or WebP in 2025?
For most websites, serve WebP as your primary format with JPEG fallback. Add AVIF as an additional <picture> source if maximum compression matters and your image pipeline can handle the slower encoding. As of 2025, a WebP-first approach covers 96%+ of browsers.
Does AVIF support transparency?
Yes. AVIF supports an alpha channel for full transparency, just like WebP and PNG.
Can Safari display AVIF?
Yes, since Safari 16 (September 2022). Earlier Safari versions (14 and 15) do not support AVIF but do support WebP. If you're serving AVIF, always include a WebP or JPEG fallback.
Is AVIF supported on mobile?
AVIF is supported on Chrome for Android (85+), Safari for iOS (16+, September 2022), and Samsung Internet (14+). Older Android devices on Chrome below 85 will not display AVIF without a fallback.
Does AVIF support animation?
Yes, AVIF supports animation through image sequences. However, animated AVIF has limited software support compared to animated WebP or GIF, so it's not widely used in practice yet.
Which has better quality: AVIF or WebP?
At the same file size, AVIF typically looks better than WebP for photographic content — fewer compression artefacts, better fine detail. For flat graphics and simple images, the difference is minimal.
How do I serve AVIF with a WebP fallback?
Use the HTML <picture> element: <picture><source srcset='image.avif' type='image/avif'><source srcset='image.webp' type='image/webp'><img src='image.jpg' alt='...'></picture>. Browsers pick the first format they support.