AVIF vs WebP vs JPG: Which Image Format Should You Use?
A detailed comparison of AVIF, WebP, and JPG image formats covering compression, quality, browser support, and recommendations for every use case.
The Image Format Landscape in 2025
Choosing the right image format can have a significant impact on your website's performance, your users' experience, and your bandwidth costs. The three most relevant formats for web images today are JPG (the established workhorse), WebP (Google's modern alternative), and AVIF (the newest contender with the best compression).
In this article, we'll compare all three formats across the dimensions that actually matter: compression efficiency, image quality, browser support, feature set, and suitability for different use cases. By the end, you'll know exactly which format to use and when.
Quick Comparison Table
| Feature | JPG (JPEG) | WebP | AVIF |
|---|---|---|---|
| Year introduced | 1992 | 2010 | 2019 |
| Developed by | Joint Photographic Experts Group | Alliance for Open Media | |
| Compression type | Lossy | Lossy & Lossless | Lossy & Lossless |
| Transparency | No | Yes | Yes |
| Animation | No | Yes | Yes |
| Color depth | 8-bit | 8-bit | 8, 10, or 12-bit |
| HDR support | No | No | Yes |
| Progressive loading | Yes | No | No |
| Browser support | 100% | ~97% | ~95% |
| Encoding speed | Very fast | Fast | Slow |
| Royalty-free | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Typical use case | Universal compatibility | Web images (good balance) | Web images (best compression) |
Compression and File Size
This is where the differences are most dramatic. In real-world tests across a variety of photographic images, the typical file size relationships look like this:
| Scenario | JPG (baseline) | WebP (vs JPG) | AVIF (vs JPG) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Photographic image (high quality) | 100% | 25-35% smaller | 40-55% smaller |
| Photographic image (medium quality) | 100% | 20-30% smaller | 35-50% smaller |
| Graphic / illustration | 100% | 15-25% smaller | 30-45% smaller |
| Image with text overlay | 100% | 20-30% smaller | 35-50% smaller |
The takeaway: AVIF delivers roughly 20% better compression than WebP, and both modern formats are substantially smaller than JPG. For a website serving thousands of images, switching from JPG to AVIF can cut image bandwidth nearly in half.
Image Quality
JPG
JPG uses DCT-based compression that has been refined over three decades. At high quality settings (85-95), JPG produces excellent results for photographs. However, at lower quality settings, JPG suffers from visible blocking artifacts — the telltale "blocky" appearance in areas of smooth gradients or solid colors. JPG also struggles with sharp edges and text, producing "ringing" artifacts around high-contrast boundaries.
WebP
WebP uses VP8-based compression (lossy) or a separate algorithm for lossless compression. It generally avoids the worst of JPG's blocking artifacts, but at aggressive compression levels it can produce a characteristic "smearing" effect where fine textures are lost. WebP handles sharp edges and text better than JPG, but can sometimes produce a slightly softer look overall.
AVIF
AVIF benefits from AV1's advanced coding tools, which are a generation ahead of what JPG and WebP use. In practice, this means AVIF handles gradients, skin tones, and subtle textures noticeably better than either JPG or WebP at equivalent file sizes. At very low bitrates (aggressive compression), AVIF can sometimes produce a "painterly" or overly-smooth look, but it avoids the blocking and ringing artifacts that plague JPG.
In formal quality metrics like SSIM (structural similarity) and VMAF (video multi-method assessment fusion), AVIF consistently scores highest at any given file size.
Browser and Software Support
JPG
JPG is universally supported. Every browser, every operating system, every image editor, every device — if it can display an image, it can display a JPG. This is JPG's strongest advantage and the reason it remains relevant despite being technically outclassed by newer formats.
WebP
WebP has near-universal browser support in 2025, covering roughly 97% of users globally. Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari (14+), and Opera all support WebP. Desktop software support is also good — most major image editors can open WebP files. WebP is a safe choice for web use with minimal compatibility concerns.
AVIF
AVIF browser support has reached about 95% of global users, with Chrome (85+), Firefox (93+), Edge (85+), and Safari (16.4+) all on board. Desktop software support is still catching up — notably, Adobe Photoshop's AVIF support remains limited. If you need to work with AVIF files in software that doesn't support them, our AVIF to JPG converter can bridge the gap.
Encoding and Decoding Speed
One area where JPG maintains a clear advantage is speed. JPG encoding is extremely fast — a modern CPU can encode thousands of JPGs per second. WebP encoding is somewhat slower but still fast enough for real-time applications. AVIF encoding, on the other hand, is significantly slower. Encoding a single high-resolution AVIF image can take several seconds, which makes it impractical for real-time processing pipelines.
Decoding speeds tell a somewhat different story. While AVIF decoding is slower than JPG decoding, modern hardware handles it well enough that users won't notice any difference when viewing images on a web page. The decoding performance gap is negligible for typical use cases.
Recommendations by Use Case
Websites and Web Applications
Best choice: AVIF with JPG fallback. Use the <picture> element to serve AVIF to supporting browsers and JPG to the rest. The file size savings translate directly to faster page loads and better Core Web Vitals scores. You can use our JPG to AVIF converter to batch-convert your existing image library.
Social Media
Best choice: JPG. Most social media platforms re-encode uploaded images in their own preferred format. Upload the highest quality JPG you can, and let the platform handle format optimization. There's no benefit to uploading AVIF or WebP since the platform will re-compress it anyway.
Email Newsletters
Best choice: JPG. Email client support for modern image formats is inconsistent at best. Many email clients — especially older versions of Outlook — don't support WebP or AVIF. JPG is the only safe choice for email images.
Print and Professional Photography
Best choice: JPG or TIFF. Print workflows are built around established formats. While AVIF's quality is excellent, print shops, stock photo agencies, and professional editing software expect JPG or TIFF. If you receive images in AVIF format and need to prepare them for print, convert them to JPG using our AVIF to JPG converter.
Archival and Lossless Storage
Best choice: PNG or AVIF (lossless). Both formats support lossless compression. AVIF lossless typically produces smaller files than PNG, but PNG has the advantage of universal software support. For long-term archival where future software compatibility is a concern, PNG remains the safer bet.
Images Requiring Transparency
Best choice: AVIF or WebP. Both formats support alpha channels with much better compression than PNG. If you need a transparent background image for the web, AVIF will give you the smallest file size, with WebP as a close second.
Conclusion
There is no single "best" image format for every situation, but the general hierarchy for web use in 2025 is clear: AVIF > WebP > JPG in terms of compression efficiency and feature set. However, JPG's universal compatibility means it isn't going away anytime soon.
The practical recommendation is to adopt AVIF as your primary web format, use the <picture> element for fallbacks, and keep JPG for contexts where maximum compatibility is essential (email, social media uploads, print). Tools like our AVIF to JPG and JPG to AVIF converters make it easy to move between formats as needed.