AVIF vs WebP: Compatibility and Size Trade-offs

AVIF and WebP are both modern formats designed to make images smaller on the web. If you are optimizing a site, they are the two options you will compare most often.

The practical summary:

• WebP: great compression, excellent feature set, and broad support in modern browsers.
• AVIF: often even smaller at similar quality, but support is more limited and workflows can be more complex.

If you want to try both quickly, these two tools cover the common cases:

• JPG to WebP
• JPG to AVIF

AVIF vs WebP: how to choose

Choose WebP if you want the safest “modern default”

WebP is a great choice when you want smaller images without taking on much risk. It is supported in most modern browsers and is widely handled by tools and CDNs.

WebP is also a strong choice when:

• You want a modern format that is still predictable in most workflows
• You do not want to maintain a complex image pipeline
• You are converting lots of images and want consistent results

Choose AVIF if you are pushing for the smallest files

AVIF is a great choice when:

• You are optimizing large photos
• You care about mobile bandwidth
• You have an image delivery pipeline that supports fallbacks

AVIF tends to shine on large photographic images where every kilobyte matters.

Compatibility reality check

AVIF support is improving, but the key point is that “some support” is not the same as “everyone who touches this file can open it”.

If you are distributing files to humans (email attachments, client deliverables, downloads), the safest outputs are still:

• JPG for photos
• PNG for screenshots and graphics

For websites (where you can serve fallbacks), AVIF can be a great primary format.

A practical workflow

If you run a website, a common workflow is:

1. Generate AVIF for browsers that support it.
2. Generate WebP as a fallback.
3. Keep JPG/PNG as the ultimate fallback for legacy clients and email/sharing.

If you do not have fallbacks, WebP alone may be the better move.

How to decide using your own images

Instead of guessing, pick 3 representative images and test:

• A portrait (skin tones)
• A detailed texture (fabric, foliage)
• A gradient-heavy shot (sky, shadows)

Then:

1. Convert them to WebP: JPG to WebP
2. Convert them to AVIF: JPG to AVIF
3. Compare at 100% zoom and compare file sizes.

If AVIF is meaningfully smaller with no visible quality drop, it is worth adding to your pipeline.

Related conversions

• Starting from PNG instead? PNG to WebP
• Need compatibility exports? AVIF to JPG

FAQ

• Is AVIF “better” than WebP? Sometimes. AVIF can be smaller at similar quality, but WebP is often simpler and more widely supported. The right choice depends on your delivery strategy.
• Should I use both? Many websites do: AVIF first, WebP fallback, JPG/PNG fallback. If you do not have fallbacks, WebP is usually the safer single choice.
• Is this private? Yes. QuickImager converts locally in your browser with no uploads.

If you want to test AVIF quickly: Convert JPG to AVIF.