HEVC vs H.264: A Developer’s Guide to Choosing the Right Video Codec for Streaming Applications

Every developer building a streaming application faces the same question: should I use H.264 or HEVC? The answer affects everything from your bandwidth costs to which devices can play your content.

H.264, also known as AVC (Advanced Video Coding), is the video compression standard that made HD streaming possible. Released in 2003, it remains the most widely deployed codec in the world, supported by virtually every browser, device, and platform you can name. HEVC, or H.265, arrived a decade later with a compelling promise: deliver the same video quality at roughly half the bitrate. This 50% compression improvement makes HEVC particularly attractive for 4K streaming, where bandwidth savings translate directly into lower CDN costs and better mobile experiences.

But choosing between these codecs involves more than compression numbers. H.264 offers near-universal compatibility, simpler licensing, and faster encoding. HEVC delivers superior efficiency but comes with fragmented browser support, higher encoding complexity, and patent licensing considerations that have shaped the entire streaming industry.

This guide breaks down the technical differences that matter for your streaming application, provides clear use-case recommendations, and shows you how modern video APIs can handle codec complexity automatically through adaptive bitrate streaming—letting you focus on building features instead of managing video infrastructure.

What Is H.264 (AVC)?

H.264, also called AVC (Advanced Video Coding) or MPEG-4 Part 10, is a video compression standard that reduces video file sizes by up to 80% compared to uncompressed video while maintaining visual quality. Developed jointly by the ITU-T Video Coding Experts Group and ISO/IEC Moving Picture Experts Group, H.264 was finalized in 2003 and quickly became the foundation of modern video streaming.

The codec works through predictive coding and transform coding. Instead of storing every frame in full, H.264 identifies similarities between frames (temporal redundancy) and within frames (spatial redundancy), then stores only the differences. Video content gets divided into 16×16 pixel blocks called macroblocks, which the encoder analyzes and compresses using various prediction modes.

H.264’s dominance stems from one key advantage: universal support. Every major browser—Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge—decodes H.264 natively. Every smartphone, tablet, smart TV, and streaming device includes H.264 hardware decoding. This ubiquity means developers can confidently deliver H.264 content knowing it will play everywhere, from a decade-old Android phone to the latest Apple TV.

The standard includes multiple profiles (Baseline, Main, High) and levels that define capability requirements. The High Profile at Level 4.1 covers most streaming use cases, supporting 1080p at 30fps with efficient compression. For developers building video encoding pipelines, understanding these profiles helps optimize the balance between quality, file size, and device compatibility.

Despite being over two decades old, H.264 remains actively used across streaming services, video conferencing, broadcast television, and Blu-ray discs. Its proven reliability and broad compatibility make it the safe default choice for any application requiring universal video playback.

What Is HEVC (H.265)?

HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding), also known as H.265 or MPEG-H Part 2, is a video compression standard that achieves approximately 50% better compression efficiency than H.264 at equivalent visual quality. Finalized in 2013 by the same organizations that developed H.264, HEVC was designed to address the growing demand for 4K and UHD content delivery.

The efficiency gains come from fundamental architectural improvements. Where H.264 uses fixed 16×16 macroblocks, HEVC introduces Coding Tree Units (CTUs) that can range from 16×16 up to 64×64 pixels. These larger, more flexible building blocks allow the encoder to handle homogeneous regions more efficiently while still using smaller units for detailed areas. HEVC also includes 35 intra prediction modes compared to H.264’s 9, enabling better prediction of pixel values within a frame.

For practical streaming applications, this translates to significant bandwidth savings. A 1080p stream that requires 6 Mbps in H.264 needs only about 3 Mbps in HEVC. At 4K resolution, the difference becomes even more pronounced: H.264 might require 32 Mbps while HEVC delivers comparable quality at 15 Mbps. For platforms serving millions of viewers, these reductions directly impact CDN costs and user experience on bandwidth-constrained connections.

However, HEVC adoption comes with tradeoffs. Browser support remains fragmented—Safari supports it universally, but Chrome requires specific hardware, and Firefox lacks native support entirely. The patent licensing situation involves multiple pools (MPEG LA and Access Advance), creating complexity that contributed to the industry developing royalty-free alternatives like AV1. For a deeper look at HEVC capabilities, see our guide on the HEVC video format.

HEVC excels in specific scenarios: 4K streaming where bandwidth efficiency is critical, iOS applications where support is guaranteed, and OTT platforms where device environments are controlled. It represents the current generation of high-efficiency video coding, even as newer codecs emerge.

HEVC vs H.264: Key Technical Differences

Understanding the technical differences between these codecs helps you make informed decisions for your streaming architecture. The following comparison covers the specifications that directly impact development and deployment choices.

Compression Efficiency and Bitrate Requirements

HEVC delivers 40-50% better compression than H.264 at equivalent visual quality. This efficiency gain translates directly to bandwidth and storage savings across your streaming infrastructure.

Here’s what the bitrate differences look like at common resolutions:

• 720p: H.264 typically requires 3-4 Mbps; HEVC achieves similar quality at 1.5-2 Mbps
• 1080p: H.264 requires approximately 6 Mbps; HEVC requires around 3 Mbps (50% reduction)
• 4K: H.264 requires 32 Mbps; HEVC delivers comparable quality at 15 Mbps (53% reduction)

The efficiency gains become more pronounced at higher resolutions. At 720p, you might see 15-25% bandwidth savings. At 4K, savings often exceed 50%. This pattern makes HEVC particularly valuable for platforms serving high-resolution content.

For business impact, consider a platform streaming 1 million hours of 4K content monthly. The difference between 32 Mbps (H.264) and 15 Mbps (HEVC) represents roughly 7.6 petabytes of monthly data transfer savings. At typical CDN rates, that’s a substantial reduction in infrastructure costs.

Mobile users also benefit significantly. A viewer watching a 2-hour movie on cellular data would consume approximately 28 GB with H.264 4K but only 13 GB with HEVC—staying within typical data caps while maintaining visual quality.

These savings depend on content characteristics. High-motion content (sports, action sequences) shows efficiency gains closer to 35-40%, while static content (presentations, talking heads) may see gains exceeding 50%. Encoder quality and settings also affect real-world results, with premium encoders extracting more efficiency from both codecs.

Video Quality at Equivalent Bitrates

The compression efficiency story has another side: at the same bitrate, HEVC produces noticeably better visual quality than H.264. This matters most when bandwidth constraints force you to work with lower bitrates.

At equivalent bitrates, HEVC shows fewer compression artifacts, reduced blocking (those visible square patterns in gradients), and better preservation of fine details like text, textures, and edges. The advanced prediction modes in HEVC handle complex content—hair, foliage, water—with fewer visible compromises.

Quality metrics confirm what viewers perceive. HEVC typically achieves 1-2 dB higher PSNR (Peak Signal-to-Noise Ratio) scores at the same bitrate. VMAF (Video Multimethod Assessment Fusion), Netflix’s perceptual quality metric, similarly favors HEVC when bitrates are matched. For reference, an H.264 stream at approximately 25 Mbps delivers roughly equivalent quality to HEVC at 12 Mbps.

High-motion content benefits most from HEVC’s quality advantages. Sports broadcasts, action sequences, and gaming content show fewer motion artifacts and better temporal consistency. The larger CTU sizes help HEVC maintain quality during rapid scene changes where H.264 might struggle.

This quality advantage becomes especially relevant for bandwidth-constrained scenarios: mobile streaming over cellular connections, emerging markets with limited infrastructure, or applications where you need to serve acceptable quality at the lowest possible bitrate. In these cases, HEVC can make the difference between watchable and unwatchable video.

Device and Browser Compatibility

Compatibility is H.264’s strongest advantage and HEVC’s most significant limitation. Understanding the current support landscape is essential for making codec decisions.

H.264 compatibility:

• All major browsers: Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge (100% coverage)
• All iOS and Android devices
• All smart TVs and streaming devices (Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV, Chromecast)
• Legacy devices going back over a decade
• Hardware decoding support on virtually all modern processors

HEVC compatibility:

• Safari and iOS: Universal support since iOS 11 and Safari 11
• Chrome: Limited—requires hardware decoding, typically only works on Windows and macOS with compatible GPUs
• Firefox: No native HEVC support
• Android: Fragmented—most devices since 2016 support it, but not guaranteed
• Smart TVs: Most 4K TVs support HEVC; older models may not

While over 75% of devices technically support HEVC, that remaining 25% often includes significant user segments. A web-based streaming player relying solely on HEVC would fail for Firefox users entirely and for Chrome users without appropriate hardware.

This fragmentation reflects competing industry interests. Apple embraced HEVC for its efficiency benefits. Google invested in VP9 and AV1 instead, which explains Chrome’s limited HEVC support. The practical result: developers targeting broad browser-based audiences must either use H.264 exclusively or implement multi-codec delivery.

For applications with controlled device environments—native iOS apps, enterprise deployments with known hardware, or OTT platforms targeting specific devices—HEVC’s compatibility limitations matter less. For browser-based players serving unknown audiences, H.264 remains essential.

Many streaming platforms solve this by delivering both codecs through HLS streaming, serving HEVC to capable devices while falling back to H.264 for broader compatibility.

Encoding Complexity and Processing Requirements

HEVC’s compression efficiency comes at a computational cost. Software encoding with HEVC requires 2-10x more processing power than H.264, depending on encoder settings and content complexity.

For software encoding, popular open-source options illustrate the difference:

• x264 (H.264): Can achieve real-time 1080p encoding on modern CPUs with good quality
• x265 (HEVC): Same quality settings may run at 0.2-0.5x real-time on the same hardware

This complexity impacts several areas:

Cloud transcoding costs: HEVC encoding takes longer, consuming more compute hours. If H.264 transcoding costs $X, expect HEVC to cost $2-4X for equivalent quality settings. At scale, this difference significantly affects infrastructure budgets.

Real-time encoding: Live streaming demands real-time or faster encoding speeds. H.264 achieves this comfortably on modest hardware. HEVC live encoding typically requires either reduced quality settings, powerful hardware encoders, or high-end server configurations.

Hardware encoders narrow the gap: Modern GPU encoders (NVIDIA NVENC, Intel Quick Sync, Apple VideoToolbox) dramatically reduce HEVC encoding time. NVENC can encode HEVC at speeds comparable to software H.264 while maintaining good quality. For platforms investing in hardware encoding infrastructure, the complexity gap becomes much more manageable.

Decoding is less demanding: While encoding HEVC requires significantly more resources, decoding differences are smaller. Most modern devices decode both codecs via dedicated hardware, making playback performance similar for end users.

For developers, the encoding complexity question often becomes a build-vs-buy decision. Building and maintaining HEVC encoding infrastructure requires significant investment. Video APIs like LiveAPI handle video transcoding automatically, with instant encoding features that make videos playable in seconds regardless of codec choice—abstracting the complexity entirely.

Licensing and Patent Considerations

Video codecs involve patents, and the licensing landscape differs significantly between H.264 and HEVC.

H.264 licensing is largely settled. MPEG LA administers the patent pool, and importantly, H.264 streaming over the internet has been royalty-free since 2010. This means most developers can use H.264 for web streaming without direct patent licensing concerns. The established, predictable licensing situation contributed to H.264’s widespread adoption.

HEVC licensing involves multiple patent pools with ongoing complexity. MPEG LA and Access Advance each administer separate pools of HEVC patents, and some patent holders remain outside these pools entirely. Licensing fees vary based on usage, with different terms for device manufacturers, content distributors, and streaming services.

This licensing fragmentation created real industry impact:

• Major technology companies formed the Alliance for Open Media specifically to develop AV1 as a royalty-free alternative
• Some streaming platforms avoid HEVC for distribution despite its technical benefits
• Browser vendors cite licensing as one reason for limited HEVC support

For most application developers using HEVC through existing platforms or APIs, licensing concerns are typically handled upstream. If you’re building a device, platform, or service that directly implements HEVC encoding or decoding, consulting legal counsel about specific licensing obligations is advisable.

The licensing situation doesn’t make HEVC unusable—major platforms like Apple’s ecosystem and many OTT services use it extensively. It does add a consideration that doesn’t exist with H.264, and it explains why the industry continues investing in royalty-free alternatives.

When to Use H.264: Best Use Cases

H.264 remains the right choice for many streaming applications. Its universal compatibility and proven reliability make it ideal for specific scenarios where reach and simplicity matter more than maximum efficiency.

Choose H.264 when you need:

Maximum device and browser reach: If your application must play video for every possible user—regardless of browser, device age, or platform—H.264 is the only codec that guarantees universal playback. Web applications serving unknown audiences, enterprise tools deployed across diverse IT environments, and public-facing video players all benefit from H.264’s ubiquity.

Browser-based streaming: For video playing in web browsers, H.264 works everywhere. Firefox users, Chrome users without specific hardware, and users on older systems all get reliable playback. If your distribution strategy centers on embedded web players, H.264 eliminates compatibility concerns entirely.

Real-time encoding for live streaming: Live streaming demands encoding speeds that match capture speeds. H.264’s lower computational requirements make real-time encoding achievable on more modest hardware. For applications using RTMP protocol or similar live ingest, H.264 ensures encoding keeps pace with live content.

Quick time-to-market: When launching an MVP or adding video features to an existing application, H.264 lets you ship without compatibility testing across device matrices. You can always add HEVC support later for users who benefit from it.

Video conferencing and WebRTC: Real-time communication applications typically use H.264 for its low-latency encoding characteristics and universal support. WebRTC implementations commonly default to H.264 for these reasons.

Legacy system integration: Applications connecting to existing video infrastructure—broadcast systems, surveillance setups, enterprise video platforms—often require H.264 for interoperability.

For platforms serving diverse audiences through web players, H.264’s universal support makes it the default starting point. LiveAPI’s Live Streaming API supports RTMP ingest from any encoder and generates HLS output for broad device delivery, making H.264 distribution straightforward.

When to Use HEVC: Best Use Cases

HEVC’s efficiency advantages become compelling in specific scenarios where bandwidth savings outweigh compatibility complexity. The codec excels when you control the device environment or when higher resolutions make efficiency critical.

Choose HEVC when you need:

4K and UHD content delivery: HEVC’s efficiency gains are most pronounced at higher resolutions. The difference between 32 Mbps (H.264) and 15 Mbps (HEVC) for 4K content represents substantial bandwidth and CDN cost savings at scale. Platforms delivering premium 4K content—streaming services, fitness applications with high-motion content, professional video distribution—benefit significantly from HEVC efficiency.

Bandwidth-constrained delivery: For audiences on limited connections—mobile users on cellular data, viewers in emerging markets with infrastructure limitations, or scenarios requiring offline downloads—HEVC’s smaller file sizes deliver better experiences. A 50% reduction in data consumption can mean the difference between smooth playback and constant buffering.

iOS and Apple ecosystem applications: Native iOS apps benefit from universal HEVC support across all recent Apple devices. If your primary audience uses iPhones, iPads, or Apple TV, you can deploy HEVC confidently without fallback concerns. Apple’s ecosystem represents one of the few environments where HEVC works universally.

OTT platforms with controlled device environments: Streaming services distributed through dedicated apps on smart TVs, Roku, Fire TV, and gaming consoles can implement HEVC knowing their target devices support it. These controlled environments eliminate the browser compatibility concerns that affect web-based delivery.

HDR and premium video quality: HEVC’s Main 10 profile supports 10-bit color depth required for HDR content (HDR10, Dolby Vision). Platforms delivering premium visual experiences often pair HDR capabilities with HEVC efficiency.

High-volume streaming operations: For platforms serving millions of viewing hours, even modest percentage savings in bandwidth translate to significant cost reductions. Media companies and large-scale OTT platforms often justify HEVC’s encoding overhead through delivery savings.

LiveAPI supports streaming up to 4K video quality, with CDN partnerships across Akamai, Cloudflare, and Fastly for efficient global delivery of high-resolution content.

Delivering Both Codecs: Adaptive Bitrate Streaming Strategy

For many streaming applications, the best answer to “H.264 or HEVC?” is “both.” Adaptive Bitrate Streaming (ABR) enables serving the optimal codec to each viewer based on their device capabilities and network conditions.

How multi-codec ABR works:

You encode your source video into multiple renditions at various quality levels (the “encoding ladder”) for both H.264 and HEVC. The ABR manifest (HLS or DASH) describes all available streams. When a viewer requests content, their player evaluates device codec support and selects the best available option—HEVC for compatible devices, H.264 for everything else. As network conditions change, the player switches between quality levels within the selected codec.

Benefits of multi-codec delivery:

• Universal reach: H.264 fallback ensures every device can play your content
• Efficiency where possible: HEVC-capable devices enjoy bandwidth savings and quality improvements
• Future-ready architecture: Adding new codecs (AV1) follows the same pattern
• Optimized experience: Each viewer gets the best their device can handle

Implementation considerations:

Multi-codec delivery requires encoding each source video twice—once for H.264 and once for HEVC. This doubles transcoding costs and storage requirements for encoded assets. For platforms with large content libraries, the infrastructure investment is significant.

HLS manifests support multi-codec streams natively, making the protocol ideal for this approach. The manifest specifies codec information, and compliant players automatically select appropriate streams. DASH similarly supports codec negotiation.

Players must handle codec selection intelligently. Modern players like HLS.js and platform-native players handle this automatically, but custom implementations need explicit codec support detection and fallback logic.

Simplifying multi-codec delivery:

Building multi-codec ABR infrastructure from scratch involves significant engineering: encoding pipelines for both codecs, storage management, manifest generation, CDN configuration, and player integration. Video APIs abstract this complexity entirely.

LiveAPI’s Video Encoding API handles automatic transcoding with adaptive bitrate streaming built in. Videos become playable in seconds after upload, with quality renditions generated automatically. The embeddable player manages codec selection, and HLS URLs work out-of-the-box for OTT platforms. Instead of building transcoding infrastructure, you integrate an API and focus on your application’s unique features.

Implementation Considerations for Developers

Moving from codec selection to actual implementation involves decisions across your encoding pipeline, delivery infrastructure, and player integration. The following sections address key technical considerations for development teams.

Encoding Pipeline Setup

Your encoding approach affects cost, quality, scalability, and time-to-market. Consider the build-vs-buy tradeoff carefully.

Self-managed encoding:

FFmpeg with x264/x265 libraries provides complete control over encoding parameters. You can fine-tune every setting for your specific content and quality requirements. However, self-managed encoding requires:

• Infrastructure provisioning and scaling (compute resources scale with encoding volume)
• Queue management for encoding jobs
• Monitoring and alerting for pipeline health
• Error handling and retry logic
• Storage management for source and output files
• Ongoing maintenance as encoder libraries update

Hardware encoding (NVIDIA NVENC, Intel Quick Sync) dramatically improves encoding speed, especially for HEVC. Dedicated encoding servers with GPU acceleration can approach real-time HEVC encoding at good quality levels.

Cloud encoding services:

AWS Elemental, Google Transcoder API, and similar services provide managed encoding infrastructure. They handle scaling, but you still manage job orchestration, output handling, and integration complexity.

API-based encoding:

Video APIs like LiveAPI’s Video Encoding API provide the simplest integration path. Upload a video via direct upload, URL, or cloud storage integration, and the API handles transcoding, rendition generation, and delivery preparation automatically.

const sdk = require('api')('@liveapi/v1.0#5pfjhgkzh9rzt4');

sdk.post('/videos', {
    input_url: 'https://your-storage.com/source-video.mp4'
})
.then(res => console.log(res))
.catch(err => console.error(err));

Instant encoding means videos become playable in seconds regardless of length—you’re not waiting for complete transcoding before users can start watching. For teams focused on building application features rather than video infrastructure, API-based encoding eliminates months of pipeline development.

Player and Delivery Configuration

Getting encoded video to viewers requires player implementation and CDN configuration that handle codec selection gracefully.

Player options:

For browser-based playback, libraries like HLS.js and Video.js handle ABR and codec fallback automatically. They parse HLS manifests, detect device codec support, and select appropriate streams. Custom player implementations need explicit capability detection using MediaSource.isTypeSupported() for accurate codec support checks.

Native mobile players (AVPlayer on iOS, ExoPlayer on Android) provide built-in HLS support with codec handling. OTT platforms (Roku, Fire TV, Apple TV) have specific player APIs with their own codec support characteristics.

CDN considerations:

Multi-codec delivery means storing multiple renditions of each video. CDN configuration should support efficient caching of all variants without duplicating effort. Origin pull configurations need to handle manifest requests and segment requests appropriately for both codecs.

Cache key strategies matter when serving different codecs to different devices—ensure your CDN configuration doesn’t serve HEVC content to H.264-only devices due to caching misconfigurations.

Simplified delivery:

LiveAPI’s embeddable player provides complete customization for appearance and functionality while handling codec complexity automatically. With partnerships across Akamai, Fastly, and Cloudflare, delivery infrastructure spans global coverage without CDN configuration headaches. HLS URLs are generated automatically for immediate use with OTT platforms and custom players.

Testing Across Devices and Networks

Video delivery has too many variables for assumptions. Systematic testing across your target device matrix catches issues before users encounter them.

Device testing priorities:

• Browsers: Test H.264 playback on Chrome, Firefox, Safari, and Edge. Test HEVC specifically on Safari and Chrome (where hardware support exists).
• Mobile: Test on iOS devices (where HEVC works universally) and representative Android devices (where HEVC support varies).
• OTT devices: If targeting smart TVs or streaming devices, test on actual hardware—emulators may not reflect real codec support.

Network condition testing:

ABR behavior depends on network conditions. Use browser developer tools or network simulation to test:

• Playback startup time on slow connections
• Quality switching behavior as bandwidth fluctuates
• Rebuffering frequency under constrained conditions
• Fallback behavior when preferred codec streams fail

Ongoing monitoring:

Testing catches issues before launch, but production monitoring catches issues at scale. Track playback success rates by device and codec, buffering events, quality level distribution, and error rates.

LiveAPI provides livestream analytics for input health and viewer engagement data, webhooks for automated event notifications, and event logs for debugging playback issues. These tools make video QA an ongoing practice rather than a one-time checkpoint.

Future Considerations: AV1 and Next-Generation Codecs

The codec landscape continues evolving. Understanding emerging options helps you build infrastructure that accommodates future improvements.

AV1: Developed by the Alliance for Open Media (including Google, Apple, Amazon, Netflix, and others), AV1 delivers approximately 30% better compression than HEVC with royalty-free licensing. The codec addresses HEVC’s patent complexity while pushing efficiency further.

Current AV1 adoption status:

• Growing browser support (Chrome, Firefox, Edge)
• Hardware decoder support expanding but not yet universal
• Encoding remains computationally expensive (more than HEVC)
• Major streaming services (Netflix, YouTube) actively deploying AV1

For most applications in 2024, H.264 with HEVC where supported remains the practical approach. AV1 hardware decoder penetration hasn’t reached levels that enable universal deployment. However, monitoring AV1 adoption makes sense for platforms planning multi-year infrastructure investments.

VVC (H.266): The latest standard promises 50% efficiency gains over HEVC, but faces the same adoption timeline and licensing considerations as its predecessor. Practical deployment remains years away.

Future-proofing strategy: Building on API-based infrastructure simplifies future codec transitions. When AV1 hardware support reaches sufficient penetration, adding it to your encoding pipeline means updating API configurations rather than rebuilding transcoding infrastructure. The abstraction that makes H.264/HEVC codec management simple today makes future codec evolution manageable tomorrow.

Frequently Asked Questions: HEVC vs H.264

Q: Is HEVC the same as H.265?

A: Yes, HEVC (High Efficiency Video Coding) and H.265 refer to the same video compression standard. HEVC is the marketing name while H.265 is the ITU-T designation. It’s also known as MPEG-H Part 2.

Q: Can I convert H.264 to HEVC without quality loss?

A: Converting H.264 to HEVC involves re-encoding, which introduces some generation loss. For best results, always encode from the highest quality source available. The conversion may still be worthwhile for bandwidth savings, but quality will be slightly lower than encoding directly to HEVC from the original source.

Q: Which codec is better for live streaming?

A: H.264 is generally better for live streaming due to faster encoding, universal playback support, and lower latency. HEVC’s computational complexity makes real-time encoding more demanding, though it’s viable with hardware encoders for bandwidth-critical 4K live applications. LiveAPI supports RTMP and SRT ingest for live streaming from any encoder.

Q: Does YouTube use H.264 or HEVC?

A: YouTube primarily uses H.264 and VP9 (Google’s codec) for delivery. YouTube does not widely serve HEVC due to licensing costs and their investment in VP9/AV1. For uploading, YouTube accepts both H.264 and HEVC source files.

Q: What’s the best codec for mobile streaming apps?

A: For iOS apps, HEVC offers significant bandwidth savings with universal support. For Android, H.264 provides the safest compatibility. Many mobile streaming apps use ABR to serve HEVC to capable devices while falling back to H.264 for broader compatibility.

Q: How do I check if a device supports HEVC?

A: Use the MediaSource.isTypeSupported('video/mp4; codecs="hvc1"') JavaScript API to check browser HEVC support. For server-side detection, examine User-Agent strings or use capability negotiation during ABR manifest delivery. Native platforms provide specific APIs for codec capability queries.

Making Your Codec Decision

The H.264 vs HEVC decision comes down to a clear tradeoff: H.264 guarantees universal reach; HEVC delivers superior efficiency where supported.

Choose H.264 when universal compatibility matters most—browser-based players, unknown device environments, real-time live streaming, or rapid deployment timelines.

Choose HEVC when efficiency matters most—4K content delivery, iOS-focused applications, controlled OTT environments, or bandwidth-constrained scenarios.

Choose both when you want optimal experiences for all viewers—ABR delivery with HEVC for capable devices and H.264 fallback for universal coverage.

Building video infrastructure that handles codec selection, transcoding, adaptive bitrate delivery, and global distribution requires significant engineering investment. Or it requires the right API.

LiveAPI provides comprehensive video streaming infrastructure through developer-friendly APIs. Upload a video, and instant transcoding makes it playable in seconds. Adaptive bitrate streaming handles codec selection automatically. CDN partnerships with Akamai, Cloudflare, and Fastly ensure global delivery. The embeddable player works across browsers and devices.

Instead of spending months building encoding pipelines and managing codec complexity, you can launch streaming features in days and focus on what makes your application unique.

Get started with LiveAPI and see how quickly you can add professional video streaming to your application. Pay-as-you-grow pricing means you can start small and scale as your audience grows.