VP9 vs AV1: The Future of Royalty-Free Video Codecs

The video industry is shifting toward royalty-free codecs. VP9 and AV1 are the two leading contenders, both backed by major tech companies and free from the licensing fees that plague H.265/HEVC. Here is a practical comparison to help you choose.

Why Royalty-Free Matters

H.264 and H.265 are covered by patents. Companies that use these codecs in commercial products must pay licensing fees to patent pools (MPEG LA, Access Advance). For small businesses and independent developers, these fees can be prohibitive or legally complex.

VP9 and AV1 are both royalty-free, meaning anyone can encode, decode, and distribute video using these codecs without paying licensing fees. This has made them the preferred choice for web video.

VP9: The Established Standard

VP9 was developed by Google and released in 2013. It is the codec behind the WebM container format and powers a significant portion of YouTube's video delivery.

VP9 Strengths

Mature and battle-tested: Over a decade of real-world deployment

Strong browser support: Chrome, Firefox, Edge, and Opera all support VP9

Hardware decoding: Most devices manufactured after 2015 include VP9 hardware decoders

Good compression: 30-50% better compression than H.264 at equivalent quality

Reasonable encoding speed: 2-4x slower than H.264, but practical for real-time workflows

VP9 Limitations

No Safari support: Apple has not added VP9 support to Safari or iOS

Surpassed by AV1: AV1 offers 20-30% better compression than VP9

Limited HDR support: VP9 Profile 2 supports HDR but adoption is limited

AV1: The Next Generation

AV1 was developed by the Alliance for Open Media (AOM), whose members include Google, Apple, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft, Netflix, and Mozilla. Released in 2018, AV1 represents the most technically advanced royalty-free codec available.

AV1 Strengths

Best-in-class compression: 20-30% better than VP9, 50% better than H.264

Broad industry backing: Every major tech company is an AOM member

Growing browser support: Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari (macOS Ventura+), and Opera

HDR and wide color gamut: Native support for 10-bit and 12-bit color

Film grain synthesis: Preserves film grain appearance at lower bitrates

AV1 Limitations

Very slow encoding: 10-100x slower than H.264, making real-time encoding impractical

Limited hardware encoding: Only newest GPUs (Intel Arc, NVIDIA RTX 4000+, AMD RX 7000+) support AV1 hardware encoding

Hardware decoding gaps: Older devices lack AV1 hardware decoders, causing high CPU usage

Newer ecosystem: Some tools and workflows do not yet fully support AV1

Head-to-Head Comparison

| Factor | VP9 | AV1 | |--------|-----|-----| | Compression vs H.264 | 30-50% better | 50-70% better | | Encoding speed | 2-4x slower than H.264 | 10-100x slower than H.264 | | Browser support | Chrome, Firefox, Edge | Chrome, Firefox, Edge, Safari | | Hardware decode | Widespread (post-2015) | Growing (post-2020) | | Hardware encode | Limited | Newest GPUs only | | HDR support | Limited (Profile 2) | Native | | Licensing | Royalty-free | Royalty-free | | Container | WebM | WebM, MP4 | | Real-time encoding | Feasible | Impractical without hardware |

File Size Comparison (Real-World)

Using a 5-minute 1080p test clip at equivalent visual quality:

| Codec | File Size | Encoding Time | Quality | |-------|-----------|--------------|---------| | H.264 (x264) | 95 MB | 48 sec | Excellent | | VP9 (libvpx-vp9) | 58 MB | 3 min 20 sec | Excellent | | AV1 (libaom-av1) | 42 MB | 45 min | Excellent | | AV1 (SVT-AV1) | 45 MB | 8 min | Excellent |

SVT-AV1 (developed by Intel) is a faster AV1 encoder that trades a small amount of compression efficiency for dramatically faster encoding. It has become the practical choice for most AV1 encoding workflows.

When to Use VP9

Choose VP9 when:

Web delivery today — VP9 has the broadest support for web video right now

Encoding speed matters — VP9 encodes fast enough for near-real-time workflows

WebM is required — VP9 is the primary video codec for the WebM container

Target audience excludes Safari/iOS — VP9 works everywhere except Apple platforms

Moderate compression improvement over H.264 is sufficient

When to Use AV1

Choose AV1 when:

Maximum compression is the priority — streaming platforms, bandwidth-constrained delivery

Encoding once, serving many — YouTube, Netflix, and similar platforms where encode time is amortized

Apple device support is needed — AV1 works in Safari, VP9 does not

Future-proofing — AV1 is the industry direction; investing in AV1 workflows now pays dividends

HDR content — AV1 has the best HDR support among royalty-free codecs

The Practical Choice for 2026

| Scenario | Recommended Codec | |----------|------------------| | Personal website video | VP9 in WebM | | YouTube upload | H.264 (YouTube re-encodes to AV1 internally) | | Streaming service | AV1 with SVT-AV1 encoder | | Real-time communication | VP9 | | Archival | AV1 for maximum space savings | | Cross-platform web delivery | AV1 (Safari support sealed the deal) |

VideoConvert and Royalty-Free Codecs

VideoConvert supports both VP9 (WebM output) and plans to add AV1 support. For most users today, VP9 in WebM delivers the best combination of compression, speed, and compatibility. When converting to WebM format, VideoConvert automatically uses the VP9 codec for optimal web delivery.

Conclusion

VP9 is the practical choice today — fast encoding, broad support, and significant compression improvements over H.264. AV1 is the future — best-in-class compression backed by every major tech company. As hardware encoding support for AV1 matures, it will eventually replace VP9 as the default web video codec. For now, use VP9 for speed and AV1 when compression matters more than encoding time.