PNG to WebP or PNG to AVIF — Which Conversion Makes More Sense?

Both WebP and AVIF compress better than PNG, support transparency, and work in modern browsers. WebP is the safe, practical choice — universal support, fast encoding, well-tested. AVIF squeezes out 10-20% more compression than WebP but encodes slower and requires Safari 16+ (vs WebP's Safari 14+). Here is how to decide.

Actual File Sizes: PNG vs WebP vs AVIF

We converted the same images to all three formats. Real numbers:

Image	PNG	WebP (q80)	AVIF (q80)	WebP Savings	AVIF Savings
Photo (4000x3000)	12.4 MB	1.8 MB	1.2 MB	85%	90%
Logo (transparent)	86 KB	28 KB	22 KB	67%	74%
Screenshot (1920x1080)	1.8 MB	380 KB	290 KB	79%	84%
Infographic	2.1 MB	420 KB	310 KB	80%	85%

AVIF consistently produces files 15-25% smaller than WebP from the same PNG source. The question is whether that extra compression justifies the tradeoffs.

Browser Support: Where Each Format Works in 2026

Browser	WebP Support	AVIF Support
Chrome	Since 2014 (v32)	Since 2020 (v85)
Firefox	Since 2019 (v65)	Since 2021 (v93)
Safari	Since 2020 (v14, macOS Big Sur)	Since 2022 (v16, macOS Ventura)
Edge	Since 2018	Since 2020
Samsung Internet	Yes	Yes

The critical difference: WebP requires Safari 14+ (macOS Big Sur, iOS 14). AVIF requires Safari 16+ (macOS Ventura, iOS 16). That two-year gap means AVIF excludes users on macOS Monterey and iOS 15 — a small but nonzero audience in 2026.

If you serve WebP, effectively 100% of your web traffic can see the images. If you serve AVIF, you might miss 1-3% on older Apple devices. The gap is shrinking but it still exists.

Sell Custom Apparel — We Handle Printing & Free Shipping

Encoding Speed: WebP Is 3-10x Faster

AVIF's better compression comes at a cost: encoding speed. Converting a batch of 50 PNGs:

• PNG to WebP: 10-15 seconds (browser tool), 5-10 seconds (cwebp CLI)
• PNG to AVIF: 30-90 seconds (browser tool), 20-60 seconds (avifenc CLI)

For a single image, you will not notice the difference. For batch jobs of 100+ images, the AVIF encoding time becomes a real workflow bottleneck. Build pipelines that convert images on deployment will see significantly longer build times with AVIF.

WebP's encoder is mature and highly optimized (it has had a decade of development). AVIF's encoder is newer and still being optimized. The speed gap will likely narrow over time, but in 2026, WebP is substantially faster.

Which to Choose: The Practical Decision

Use WebP if:

• You want the widest possible browser support
• Encoding speed matters (large batches, build pipelines)
• You want a well-tested format with years of production use
• You are converting a website's images and want a simple, reliable process

Use AVIF if:

• Maximum compression is your top priority
• You can provide WebP or PNG fallback for older browsers
• You serve image-heavy pages where every KB matters (e-commerce, media sites)
• Encoding speed is not a bottleneck in your workflow

Use both (optimal but more work):

<picture>
  <source srcset="image.avif" type="image/avif">
  <source srcset="image.webp" type="image/webp">
  <img src="image.png" alt="Description">
</picture>

This serves AVIF to browsers that support it (best compression), WebP to those that do not support AVIF (good compression), and PNG as the ultimate fallback. More files to manage, but optimal performance for every visitor.

Convert with: PNG to WebP | PNG to AVIF

What Most Sites Should Do Right Now

If you are currently serving PNG images and want to improve performance:

1. Start with WebP. Convert all your PNGs to WebP. This is the biggest single improvement you can make — 25-70% smaller files with zero compatibility issues
2. Consider AVIF for key images. Your hero banner, product photos, and other high-visibility images benefit most from AVIF's extra compression. Generate AVIF versions of these and serve them with the <picture> element
3. Do not skip WebP and go straight to AVIF. The WebP fallback is important for the small percentage of users on older Apple devices. And WebP is "good enough" for most images — the extra 15-25% from AVIF only matters for the largest, most visible images

For a complete format comparison including JPG, see our AVIF vs WebP vs JPG comparison. For format-specific conversion guides, see our best image format for websites analysis.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is AVIF better than WebP?

AVIF compresses 15-25% better than WebP and supports wider color gamut and HDR. But WebP has broader browser support (Safari 14+ vs Safari 16+), encodes 3-10x faster, and has more mature tooling. For most sites in 2026, WebP is the better practical choice. AVIF is the better technical format.

Should I convert PNG to WebP or AVIF for my website?

Start with WebP for universal compatibility and speed. Add AVIF for key images if maximum compression matters. The optimal approach is serving both with the HTML picture element, letting browsers choose the best format they support.

Can I use AVIF without a WebP fallback?

You can, but about 1-3% of web traffic (users on Safari 14-15 / iOS 14-15) cannot display AVIF. These users would see a broken image. Always provide at least a WebP or PNG fallback with the picture element.

Does AVIF support transparency like WebP?

Yes. Both AVIF and WebP support full alpha channel transparency. Both are valid PNG replacements for transparent images. AVIF even supports HDR and wider color gamuts beyond what PNG and WebP can encode.