If you’ve optimized images for the web anytime in the past few years, you’ve probably seen “AVIF” mentioned as the format that’s supposedly even better than WebP. It is, in a lot of ways — but “better on paper” and “ready to actually use as your default” are different questions, and the honest answer to the second one is more complicated than most quick summaries admit.
What AVIF Actually Is
AVIF (AV1 Image File Format) is an image format built on top of AV1, the open, royalty-free video codec developed by the Alliance for Open Media — a consortium that includes Google, Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft, and Mozilla, among others. The idea is straightforward: AV1 already knows how to compress video extremely efficiently by understanding individual frames as images; AVIF just packages a single compressed AV1 keyframe as a standalone still image file. It was standardized around 2019 and has been steadily gaining tooling and browser support since.
Like WebP, AVIF supports both lossy and lossless compression, plus a few things WebP doesn’t fully match:
- Transparency (alpha channel), same as WebP and PNG
- Animation, same as WebP and GIF
- HDR and wide color gamut support — AVIF can store more color and brightness detail than WebP, relevant for photography and video-adjacent workflows
- Up to 12-bit color depth, versus WebP’s 8-bit ceiling
The Compression Advantage
This is AVIF’s headline pitch: at equivalent visual quality, AVIF files are commonly 20–50% smaller than WebP, and the gap versus JPEG is even larger — sometimes cited as 50% or more, though exact numbers vary a lot depending on the specific image content, compression settings, and which benchmark you’re reading. Treat any single “AVIF is X% smaller” number with some skepticism; the honest range is wide, but AVIF consistently comes out ahead of both WebP and JPEG in independent testing.
There’s a real cost behind that advantage, though: AVIF encoding is significantly slower than WebP or JPEG encoding. For a one-off image export, that’s irrelevant — a second or two of extra processing time doesn’t matter. For a server or CMS generating thousands of images automatically, or a pipeline compressing images on-the-fly per request, that encoding speed difference is a real operational cost that WebP simply doesn’t have.
Browser and Tool Support: Where the Real Gaps Are
The browser story is actually good news: all major browsers now support AVIF. Chrome added support in version 85 (2020), Firefox in version 93 (2021), and Safari in version 16 (2022, tied to macOS Ventura and iOS 16). If your concern is “will modern browsers display an AVIF image,” the answer is yes, broadly, for anyone on a reasonably current browser.
The actual gaps are elsewhere, and this is the part most quick “is AVIF ready” takes skip over:
- Software and tooling support lags browser support. Some image editors, CMS plugins, and asset pipelines still don’t handle AVIF natively, or only added support recently and imperfectly
- Thumbnail and OS-level support is inconsistent. Native file-explorer thumbnail previews for AVIF have historically been spottier than for JPEG, PNG, or even WebP, depending on OS version
- Email clients essentially don’t support it at all — same limitation WebP has, but more universal for AVIF since it’s newer
- Some ad networks, upload forms, and older CMS themes don’t accept AVIF uploads yet, the same category of gap WebP had a few years into its own rollout
- Encoding speed makes it a heavier lift for automated, high-volume pipelines, as noted above — this is a tooling/infrastructure gap, not a browser one
So the practical picture in 2026 is: browser support is essentially solved, but the surrounding ecosystem — editors, CMS plugins, automated pipelines, ad platforms — hasn’t fully caught up, in a way that mirrors exactly where WebP itself was a few years into its own adoption curve.
AVIF vs WebP: Side-by-Side
| Factor | AVIF | WebP |
|---|---|---|
| Based on | AV1 video codec | VP8 video codec |
| Typical file size vs equivalent quality | Smaller — often 20–50% smaller than WebP | Larger than AVIF, but still smaller than JPEG/PNG |
| Encoding speed | Notably slower | Fast |
| Browser support | All major browsers (Chrome 85+, Firefox 93+, Safari 16+) | All major browsers, broader legacy support (~97% overall) |
| Transparency | Yes | Yes |
| Animation | Yes | Yes |
| HDR / wide color gamut / bit depth | Yes, up to 12-bit | No, 8-bit only |
| Tooling/software ecosystem maturity | Still catching up — editors, CMS, ad networks, pipelines | Mature — broadly supported for years now |
Does AllMediaTools Support AVIF?
Honestly: not yet. AllMediaTools Image Converter currently supports JPEG, PNG, WebP, GIF, BMP, and TIFF as conversion formats — AVIF isn’t in that list today. If you specifically need to convert an image to AVIF right now, browser-based tools like Squoosh (Google’s free, entirely client-side image compressor) do support AVIF output and are a genuinely good option for a one-off conversion while AllMediaTools’ own AVIF support isn’t live.
We’d rather say that plainly than imply a capability that isn’t there yet.
The Honest Verdict: Is AVIF Ready to Adopt Now?
It depends on what you’re optimizing for:
- If you’re chasing the absolute smallest possible file size and you’re willing to deal with slower encoding and some tooling gaps: AVIF is genuinely worth adopting today, especially for high-traffic sites where the bandwidth savings compound
- If you want the safest, most broadly compatible “next-gen” format with the most mature tooling, the fastest encoding, and the fewest surprises across editors, CMS platforms, and ad networks: WebP remains the more practical default in 2026, even though it’s technically less efficient than AVIF
- If you’re not sure and just want one sensible default for a typical website: stick with WebP. It’s had years longer to mature across the software ecosystem, current in-house tools (including AllMediaTools’ own converter) support it fully, and the compression gap versus AVIF, while real, isn’t large enough to justify the added encoding cost and tooling friction for most everyday use cases
AVIF isn’t a “wait and see” format anymore in the way it was a couple of years ago — browser support genuinely is there now. But “ready for a performance-obsessed team willing to manage encoding costs and tooling gaps” and “ready to be everyone’s automatic default” are still two different bars, and AVIF has only cleared the first one.
For the broader comparison including JPEG and PNG, see our WebP vs JPEG vs PNG comparison and what WebP actually is. If your specific need is transparency rather than general photo compression, see PNG vs WebP for transparency specifically — AVIF supports alpha too, but WebP’s more mature tooling makes it the more practical transparency choice today for the same reasons outlined above.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is AVIF better than WebP?
Technically, yes, on compression efficiency — AVIF files are commonly 20–50% smaller than WebP at equivalent visual quality, and AVIF supports HDR, wide color gamut, and higher bit depth that WebP doesn’t. Practically, WebP still has more mature tooling and faster encoding, which is why it remains the safer default for most sites today.
Do all browsers support AVIF now?
Yes, all major browsers do — Chrome (85+), Firefox (93+), and Safari (16+) all display AVIF images natively. The remaining gaps are in surrounding tooling (editors, CMS plugins, some ad networks) rather than browser rendering itself.
Why is AVIF not more widely used if browsers support it?
Mainly because of slower encoding (a real cost for high-volume automated pipelines) and an ecosystem of tools — image editors, CMS platforms, ad networks, upload forms — that hasn’t fully caught up to browser-level support yet. This is a similar pattern to WebP’s own adoption curve a few years earlier.
Can I convert an image to AVIF for free?
Yes — Squoosh (Google’s free, browser-based image compression tool) supports AVIF output entirely client-side. AllMediaTools’ own Image Converter doesn’t support AVIF as an output format yet, so Squoosh is the more honest recommendation for that specific need right now.
Should I switch my whole website from WebP to AVIF?
Not automatically. If your CMS, image pipeline, and ad/analytics tooling all handle AVIF cleanly and you’re comfortable with the slower encoding cost, the file-size savings can be worth it, especially at high traffic volume. For most sites, WebP remains the more practical default given its broader, more mature tooling support today.
Does AVIF support transparent backgrounds like PNG and WebP?
Yes, AVIF supports an alpha channel for transparency. That said, WebP’s more mature editor and pipeline support currently makes it the more practical choice for transparent graphics like logos and icons, even though AVIF is technically capable of the same thing.