Hacker News Reader

> JPEG XL could be twice as efficient as AVIF everywhere…

This isn't true if you're talking about encoding size efficiency. See the "Quality" chart at https://storage.googleapis.com/avif-comparison/index.html

Even JPEG XL cheerleader Cloudinary says, "JPEG XL can obtain 10 to 15% better compression than AVIF" overall, which isn't a sufficient incremental benefit. https://cloudinary.com/blog/the-case-for-jpeg-xl

View on HN

I think they were trying to say that even if it were twice as efficient and everyone benchmarked it as twice as efficient, it still wouldn't make a difference because the Google devs are biased towards AVIF. It wasn't arguing that JXL is twice as efficient. It was just arguing that even if it were twice as efficient, it wouldn't matter.

If you look at the plots in the 2nd link you are referring to, they show the gains of AVIF over WebP are also similar, so the case of AVIF "isn't a sufficient incremental benefit" as well by your criteria.

Not to mention JPEG XL can do lossless and progressive on top, and that avifenc is much slower than cjxl.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com