Video Format Comparison

H.264 vs AV1: Old Reliable vs Next-Gen Video Codec

H.264 and AV1 represent different generations of video compression. H.264 (2003) is ubiquitous — it runs on everything and is the default codec for essentially all video recording and distribution today. AV1 (2018) is the next-generation codec developed by a consortium of tech companies (Google, Netflix, Amazon, Microsoft, Mozilla, Intel, AMD, Arm, NVIDIA) as a royalty-free alternative to H.265/HEVC, with ~50% better compression than H.264. The two coexist in the market: you produce content in H.264, and services like YouTube transcode it to AV1 for delivery to users with AV1-capable hardware.

H.264vsAV1

Quick Verdict

Use H.264 when…

Use H.264 for maximum compatibility: every device, every browser, every platform, every streaming service accepts H.264 without exceptions. It's the safe universal choice for distribution.

Use AV1 when…

Use AV1 for cutting-edge streaming efficiency: Netflix, YouTube, and Chrome use AV1 for delivery because it's 50% more efficient than H.264. If you're encoding for AV1-capable platforms and modern audiences, AV1 delivers noticeably better quality.

H.264 vs AV1: Feature Comparison

Feature	H.264	AV1
Standardised	2003 — over 20 years of deployment	2018 — still in broad rollout phase
Compression vs H.264	Baseline reference	~50% more efficient — same quality at half the bitrate
Encoding speed	Very fast — hardware encoders in every modern CPU/GPU	Much slower — software encoding is CPU-intensive; hardware encoders now available on newer chips
Decoding hardware support	Universal — in every device made since ~2010	Growing — Intel 11th gen+, AMD RDNA2+, Nvidia RTX 30+, Apple A17/M3+, Android (select)
Browser support	Universal	Chrome, Firefox, Edge — Safari requires macOS 14+ / A17 devices
Licensing	Patent-encumbered — MPEG-LA patent pool	Royalty-free — Alliance for Open Media (AOMedia)
Usage	Most uploaded/recorded content — cameras, phones, recording software	Streaming delivery — YouTube, Netflix, Disney+ use AV1 for delivery

When H.264 wins

✓Standardised: 2003 — over 20 years of deployment
✓Compression vs H.264: Baseline reference
✓Encoding speed: Very fast — hardware encoders in every modern CPU/GPU

When AV1 wins

✓Standardised: 2018 — still in broad rollout phase
✓Compression vs H.264: ~50% more efficient — same quality at half the bitrate
✓Encoding speed: Much slower — software encoding is CPU-intensive; hardware encoders now available on newer chips

Frequently asked questions

Is AV1 better than H.264?

Yes — in terms of compression efficiency. AV1 achieves approximately 50% smaller file sizes than H.264 at equivalent visual quality. However, H.264 has near-universal hardware support, instant encoding, and zero compatibility issues. AV1's weaknesses are: slow software encoding (though hardware AV1 encoders are now appearing in newer chips) and still-growing hardware decode support. For recording: use H.264. For delivery over the internet: AV1 is compelling where the audience has modern hardware.

Does YouTube use AV1?

Yes — YouTube transcodes uploaded videos to AV1 for delivery to users whose devices support hardware AV1 decode. If you have a modern computer with AV1 hardware decode support, you're already watching YouTube videos in AV1 without realizing it. You can verify: right-click the YouTube player → Stats for nerds → look for 'avc1' (H.264), 'vp9' (VP9), or 'av01' (AV1) in the codec field.

Should I encode my videos in AV1?

For recording: no — stick with H.264 for camera recordings. Cameras record in H.264 or H.265 using dedicated hardware encoders; there's no benefit to recording in AV1. For streaming / content creation for YouTube: upload in H.264 MP4 (YouTube transcodes to AV1 on their end). For archiving your own content at high efficiency: AV1 with SVT-AV1 encoder is a strong option if encoding speed isn't a constraint.