AVIF vs JPG: which format should you use?

AVIF and JPG serve different masters. AVIF was built for the web — smaller files, better quality, modern compression. JPG was built for compatibility — it opens everywhere, every time, without surprises.

The right choice depends on where your image ends up, not which format is technically superior.

What is AVIF?

AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) is an image format derived from the AV1 video codec, developed by the Alliance for Open Media — a consortium that includes Google, Apple, Mozilla, Netflix, and Amazon, among others. The first stable specification landed in 2019.

The key technical fact: AVIF uses the same compression algorithms that AV1 uses for video. That is why it compresses so much better than older formats. Where JPEG was designed in 1992 and optimized for the hardware constraints of that era, AVIF takes advantage of 30 years of research in perceptual image coding.

AVIF supports:

Lossy and lossless compression
Alpha transparency (unlike JPG)
Wide color gamut and HDR
10-bit and 12-bit color depth
Animated images (like a more efficient GIF)

JPG supports none of those except lossy compression. It is a narrower format by design — and that narrowness is also its greatest strength when it comes to compatibility.

File size comparison: AVIF vs JPG

The headline number from the research is consistent: AVIF produces files roughly 50% smaller than JPG at comparable visual quality.

Real-world measurements from Jake Archibald’s testing back this up. For a photographic image, JPG came in at 74.4 kB, WebP at 43 kB, and AVIF at 18.2 kB — less than 25% of the JPG size at similar perceived quality. For complex illustrations, AVIF was under 15% of the JPG equivalent.

Smashing Magazine’s analysis found savings of up to 50% on typical web images, with extreme cases reaching 10x smaller. Netflix, one of the Alliance for Open Media founding members, has published internal data showing significant bandwidth savings at the same quality tier.

These numbers are not cherry-picked edge cases. On photographic content — the primary use case for both formats — AVIF consistently wins on file size.

The caveat: AVIF’s advantage shrinks on simple, flat images with large blocks of solid color. For those, lossless PNG or SVG often makes more sense than either AVIF or JPG.

Quality comparison

File size comparisons only matter if quality holds up. It does.

AVIF handles fine detail and gradients better than JPG at the same file size. JPG compression artifacts — the blocky distortions visible around high-contrast edges at lower quality settings — appear much later in AVIF, and look different (softer) when they do appear. For most users, AVIF’s artifacts are less visually offensive than JPG’s.

At high quality settings where both formats look nearly identical, AVIF still wins on file size. At aggressive compression settings where file size is pushed as low as possible, AVIF maintains recognizable detail where JPG falls apart.

The one area JPG holds its own: if you are re-compressing an already-compressed JPG, AVIF will not necessarily produce a smaller file. Compression artifacts compound. The best results come from encoding AVIF from a lossless source.

Browser support

AVIF browser support as of early 2026:

Browser	AVIF support
Chrome	Yes (since v85, 2020)
Edge	Yes (since v121, 2024)
Firefox	Yes (since v93, 2021)
Safari	Yes (since Safari 16, 2022)
Samsung Internet	Yes (since v14)
Opera	Yes
IE 11	No

In practical terms: any modern browser handles AVIF. The global coverage figure sits above 93% of web users. If you are targeting mainstream web audiences in 2026, browser support is no longer a meaningful blocker.

Where AVIF support still lags is outside the browser. Desktop apps, image editors, operating system file browsers, email clients, and older mobile apps vary widely. Windows Photo Viewer requires a codec pack. Older versions of macOS Preview do not open AVIF. Adobe Photoshop added support in 2021 but older versions do not have it. Many legacy CMS platforms and CDNs handle AVIF inconsistently.

This is the real compatibility gap — not browsers, but the rest of the ecosystem.

Encoding speed: AVIF is slow

AVIF’s compression efficiency comes at a cost. Encoding AVIF files takes significantly longer than encoding JPG.

On typical hardware, encoding a high-quality AVIF image from a source file can take several seconds per image. JPG encodes in milliseconds. For a batch of hundreds of product photos, this difference is not trivial.

The situation has improved — Smashing Magazine documented a 47% improvement in transcode time in early 2021 and a 73% improvement across the full year — but AVIF encoding is still measurably slower than JPG.

Decoding (displaying the image in a browser or app) is fast and comparable to JPG for most use cases.

Practical consequence: AVIF is appropriate for pre-processed assets where you encode once and serve many times. It is not the right choice for situations where images need to be generated or re-encoded on the fly at high throughput without dedicated encoding infrastructure.

AVIF vs WebP

WebP is the middle ground worth mentioning. Developed by Google, WebP has broader ecosystem support than AVIF outside the browser. Many tools that do not handle AVIF yet do handle WebP.

File size comparison:

JPG: baseline
WebP: roughly 25–35% smaller than JPG
AVIF: roughly 45–55% smaller than JPG (often half the size of WebP)

If you need a format that compresses better than JPG but works in more places than AVIF, WebP is a reasonable choice. If you want maximum compression efficiency for web delivery, AVIF wins. The two formats are not mutually exclusive — many pipelines serve AVIF to browsers that support it and WebP as a fallback.

When to use AVIF

AVIF is the right choice when:

you are publishing images on a website and controlling the output pipeline
page load speed and Core Web Vitals scores matter (images account for roughly 42% of Largest Contentful Paint elements)
you are encoding from a high-quality source file, not a pre-compressed JPG
your hosting, CDN, and CMS support AVIF delivery
file size reduction is worth the slower encoding time

The best web performance setup today is AVIF with a WebP fallback, served via the HTML <picture> element with a JPG base fallback for any remaining edge cases.

When to use JPG

JPG is the right choice when:

the file is being shared with people or tools outside your control
the destination platform — email, legacy CMS, desktop software, print workflow — does not reliably support AVIF
you are handing off images to clients, collaborators, or vendors who expect a standard format
the image will be opened on devices that may not have updated software
you want to guarantee the file opens on the first try, without troubleshooting

JPG has universal support in a way that no newer format has matched. Every operating system, every image viewer, every browser, every piece of image-aware software handles JPG. That ubiquity is worth preserving for files that travel outside a controlled environment.

Converting between AVIF and JPG

The most common direction is AVIF to JPG: you have an AVIF file from a modern camera, browser screenshot, or web asset, and you need to share it in a format that opens everywhere.

You can do this with our AVIF to JPG converter — no upload, no account, files processed locally in your browser. If you have a batch of AVIF files that need to be converted for a handoff or legacy workflow, that is the fastest path.

Going the other direction — JPG to AVIF — makes sense when you are optimizing web assets for delivery. Start from the highest-quality JPG you have (or better, the lossless source) to get the best AVIF output.

FAQ

Is AVIF better than JPG? For web delivery, yes — AVIF produces smaller files at the same quality, supports transparency and HDR, and has full modern browser coverage. For universal compatibility, JPG is still safer. “Better” depends on the use case.

Can all browsers open AVIF files? All major modern browsers support AVIF: Chrome (since 2020), Firefox (since 2021), Safari (since 2022), and Edge. Internet Explorer does not. Global browser coverage for AVIF is above 93% as of early 2026.

Why is my AVIF file larger than my JPG? This usually happens when you re-compress an already-compressed JPG to AVIF. Compression artifacts from the original JPG confuse the encoder. For best results, encode AVIF from a lossless source. It can also happen with very simple flat images where AVIF’s overhead outweighs its compression gains.

How much smaller is AVIF compared to JPG? Typical savings are 45–55% on photographic content at comparable visual quality. For some image types, the gap is larger — tests have shown AVIF files less than 25% the size of an equivalent JPG. The gap narrows on simple flat illustrations and very small images.

Is AVIF safe to use on a production website? Yes, with a fallback strategy. Use the <picture> element to serve AVIF to browsers that support it and JPG or WebP to browsers that do not. Any modern web framework or image CDN can handle this automatically.

Why does AVIF take so long to encode? AVIF’s compression algorithm is computationally expensive — a deliberate tradeoff for better compression ratios. Encoding a single high-resolution AVIF can take several seconds on standard hardware. This matters most in batch processing or real-time encoding scenarios. Decoding (viewing) is fast.

Should I convert my entire image library to AVIF? Not necessarily. Convert AVIF for web-delivered assets where file size reduction has measurable impact. Keep JPG originals in your archive. Converting everything to AVIF does not help files stored locally or shared outside the web, and the encoding time may not justify the savings for every image.

What software opens AVIF files? Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge open AVIF natively. On macOS, Preview supports AVIF since macOS Ventura. On Windows, you may need the AV1 Video Extension from the Microsoft Store. Photoshop supports AVIF since 2021. GIMP supports AVIF via a plugin. Many older tools still do not.

Summary

AVIF is the better format for web delivery. Smaller files, better quality, full modern browser support. If you are optimizing a website, AVIF should be your default output format for photographs and complex images.

JPG is the better format for everything else. Sharing files, legacy workflows, software you do not control, devices you cannot verify. When in doubt about whether a file will open, use JPG.

The practical workflow: publish AVIF on the web, convert to JPG when the file needs to travel. If you receive AVIF files and need to share them in a more compatible format, the AVIF to JPG converter handles that conversion in your browser without sending files to a server.