1 Matching Annotations
  1. Aug 2023
    1. After running the tests, I ended up with six profiles (three cached, three uncached). I’ve made those public, and you can find links to them below. First up, here’s a TL;DR of the key findings:Across all tests, loading the WebP page had the lowest energy consumption.Across all tests, loading the AVIF page had the highest energy consumption.JPEG was close to WebP in most tests.The uncached tests are fairly consistent. Testing when images are cached, however, has some wild variability. More testing is probably needed there.

      Fershad Irani looked at power consumption of images in websites. WebP came out on top (to his surprise) and JPG close. By the looks of it this is power consumption on the browser side. I suppose on the server side, power correlates with file size. The files used has JPG at 3.5 times WebP and 6 times Avif. Is webp / avif optimised for file compression (faster transmission) and less for rendering time? Does that explain the diff between Avif and Webp? All in all no biggie to stick with jpg it seems, except for choosing lowest suitable filesizes (percentwise webp would then achieve less optimisation on the transmission side)

      via Heinz .h feed.