AVIF vs JPG: Is AVIF Worth Switching To?

> what_is_avif

AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) is based on the AV1 video codec developed by the Alliance for Open Media (Google, Netflix, Apple, Amazon, and others). It was finalized in 2019 and designed to be the definitive next-generation image format — replacing both JPG for photos and PNG for graphics.

AVIF achieves exceptional compression by borrowing techniques from modern video encoding: adaptive quantization, directional transforms, and intra-frame prediction. The result is images that are 50% smaller than JPG at the same perceptual quality — a larger gain than WebP achieved over JPG. AVIF also avoids JPG's characteristic blocking artifacts entirely.

Additional capabilities: full alpha channel transparency, animation support, HDR (High Dynamic Range), and wide color gamut — none of which JPG supports. On paper, AVIF is the clear winner.

> browser_and_app_support

As of 2025, AVIF is supported by Chrome 85+ (2020), Firefox 93+ (2021), and Safari 16+ (2022). This covers approximately 90% of global browser usage. Internet Explorer (end-of-life), older Android versions, and Opera Mini do not support AVIF.

The bigger limitation is desktop application support. Most image editors and viewers still cannot open AVIF natively: older versions of Adobe Photoshop (requires plugin), GIMP, Windows Photo Viewer (older versions), and email clients. If your audience needs to open, edit, or share images in non-browser contexts, JPG remains the safer choice.

The recommended approach for web delivery: use the <picture> element with AVIF and JPG fallback:

<picture>
  <source srcset="image.avif" type="image/avif">
  <source srcset="image.webp" type="image/webp">
  <img src="image.jpg" alt="Description" width="800" height="600">
</picture>

> compression_quality_in_practice

The 50% file size reduction of AVIF over JPG is the headline number — but what does it mean in practice?

A typical product photo at 300KB JPG (85% quality) becomes approximately 150KB as AVIF at equivalent visual quality. For a landing page with 10 product images, that is 1.5MB saved per page load. On a 4G connection (20 Mbps), that difference is 0.6 seconds — measurable in Google Search Console's Core Web Vitals.

At very high compression ratios (small target file sizes), AVIF is visually cleaner than JPG. Where JPG shows blocky artifacts around faces and textures, AVIF produces a smooth, painterly blur instead — less accurate but far less visually offensive. For use cases where extreme compression is required (thumbnails, previews), AVIF is significantly better.

> the_verdict

Use AVIF when:

• Optimizing web images for Core Web Vitals and page speed
• Your audience is on modern browsers (Chrome, Firefox, Safari 16+)
• You need smaller files without quality loss for photo-heavy pages
• Using the <picture> element with JPG fallback (best practice)
• Displaying HDR or wide-gamut photography

Stick with JPG when:

• Sharing images via email, messaging apps, or social media
• The image will be opened in desktop apps (Photoshop, Windows viewer)
• Legacy browser support is a requirement
• Fast encoding time matters (build pipelines, on-the-fly conversion)

Bottom line: for web delivery in 2025, AVIF + JPG fallback via <picture> is the optimal strategy. For sharing and offline use, JPG remains the most universally compatible format. See also our AVIF vs WebP comparison for a deeper look at the two next-gen formats.