Performance of modern image formats

Modern image formats like WebP and AVIF have spectacular compression improvements over the three decades old JPEG. But they come with a downside: longer encoding and decoding times. While the encoding time is negligible – it only happens once on a server or in a build step – the decoding is done over and over again on the clients.

While researching the topic I came across this statement by Addy Osmani:

Decoding AVIF images for display can also take up more CPU power than other codecs, though smaller file sizes may compensate for this.

What I couldn’t find were any hard numbers on WebP/AVIF vs. JPEG decoding times. So began my quest to somehow collect this data myself, leading to the development of the Image Performance Measurement tool.


Response time
The time it takes the browser to request an image and receive the file.
Decode time
The time it takes the browser to read and decompress the encoded image.
Paint time
The time it takes the browser to “paint” the image’s pixels on the page.


Disclaimer: I have no idea how scientific the following approach is. The numbers match expectations, though.

In its default configuration the Image Performance Measurement tool does the following:

  1. Create scaled JPEG, WebP, and AVIF files from 10 sample images.
  2. Start a local web server and Puppeteer session.
  3. Throttle the network speed to simulated 4G.
  4. Load each image and collect the file size, response, decode, and paint time.
  5. Repeat step 4 five times to smooth out outliers.
  6. Analyze raw data and create a summary.


Slow device

Specifications: Intel Core 2 Duo T6400, 4 GB RAM, SATA1 HDD

Type Size (kB) Response (ms) Decode (ms) Paint (ms) Total (ms)
.avif 101.2182 214.22592 46.19268 0.49126 260.90986
.jpg 177.5786 241.13594 29.14996 0.08198 270.36788
.webp 126.1962 222.16746 28.57188 0.07598 250.81532

Raw data for the slow device

Fast device

Specifications: Intel Core i7-10750H, 32 GB RAM, NVMe SSD

Type Size (kB) Response (ms) Decode (ms) Paint (ms) Total (ms)
.avif 101.2182 185.6501 13.01362 0.02318 198.6869
.jpg 177.5786 195.2597 9.84462 0.02324 205.1275
.webp 126.1962 188.9901 11.29712 0.02318 200.3104

Raw data for the fast device


JPEG takes the decoding performance crown, indeed. Though, on modern devices the differences between JPEG, WebP, and AVIF are tiny – a couple of milliseconds at worst. The greatly reduced file sizes of WebP and AVIF lead to shorter response times that outweigh any advantage JPEG may have in the decoding department.

Even on slower devices the modern image formats are more performant than JPEG. True, decoding and painting AVIF takes significantly longer than JPEG, but once again the smaller file sizes of WebP and AVIF win.

And always bet on the future, I guess: JPEG had three decades to optimize every last bit. WebP is not even a dozen years old, and AVIF barely three. As old devices are replaced, the performance gap between JPEG and WebP/AVIF will only increase.