Complete Comparison: HEVCut vs. Traditional Video Compressors

Most video compression apps on the App Store follow the same playbook: import a video, drag a quality slider, export to camera roll, and hope for the best. This approach was designed a decade ago when H.264 was the only codec and iPhones had far less capable hardware.

HEVCut takes a fundamentally different approach—it's designed around HEVC hardware encoding, Photos library integration, and batch processing. But how do these differences actually play out in practice? This comparison breaks down the key areas where traditional compressors and HEVCut diverge, with specific numbers and real-world scenarios.

The Fundamental Difference: Approach to Compression

Traditional video compressors treat compression as a one-off task. You pick a video, choose a quality level, wait for export, then manually manage the result. This works for compressing a single video to share via email. It falls apart when you're trying to manage a library of hundreds of videos.

HEVCut treats compression as library management. It scans your entire photo library, identifies which videos benefit most from compression, estimates savings, and processes them in batches. The compressed video replaces the original in your library with all metadata intact.

This difference shapes every aspect of the experience.

Speed: Hardware vs. Software Encoding

This is where the gap is most dramatic. HEVCut uses Apple's hardware HEVC encoder, the same chip that encodes video during camera recording. Traditional compressors often use software encoding, either because they don't support HEVC or because they use older encoding libraries.

Real-world encoding speed for a 1-minute 4K 30fps video:

For a single video, this difference is tolerable. For a library of 100 videos, hardware encoding finishes in about 40 minutes. Software encoding takes 5-8 hours—and drains your battery in the process.

Quality: Codec Matters More Than Sliders

Traditional compressors give you a quality slider, typically ranging from "low" to "high." What this slider actually controls is the bitrate—how many bits per second are allocated to represent the video. Lower bitrate = smaller file = worse quality.

The problem: if the output codec is still H.264, even the "high quality" setting produces larger files than a properly encoded HEVC video at medium bitrate. You're adjusting quality within an inherently less efficient codec.

Same visual quality, different approaches:

The HEVC balanced profile produces a file that's 64% smaller than H.264 high quality—and looks better. This isn't a subtle difference. It's the gap between a codec from 2003 and one from 2013, compounded by hardware-optimized encoding.

Metadata: The Hidden Deal-Breaker

This is the area most people don't think about until it's too late. Your videos carry metadata: recording date, GPS location, camera model, lens data, and for Cinematic Mode videos, depth information. This metadata is what makes Photos organize your timeline, show videos on the map, and surface memories.

Traditional compressors typically export a new video file, which often strips some or all metadata. Your compressed video might show today's date instead of the date it was recorded. The location might disappear. Cinematic Mode depth data might be lost.

HEVCut preserves all original metadata by working directly with the Photos library API. The compressed video retains its original date, location, camera info, and special data like Cinematic Mode depth maps and Dolby Vision HDR.

Batch Processing: One Video vs. Your Entire Library

Traditional compressors are built for single-video workflows. Select a video, configure settings, wait, export. Some support selecting a few videos at once, but the process is manual and often limited to 5-10 videos.

HEVCut is built for library-scale operations:

• Library scanning: Analyzes every video to identify compression candidates
• Savings estimates: Shows how much space each video will save before processing
• Priority sorting: Surfaces the highest-value targets (large H.264 files) first
• Background processing: Compression continues when you switch apps
• Queue management: Process hundreds of videos in a single batch

For someone with 30 GB of video, the difference between compressing one video at a time and batch processing is the difference between a weekend project and a 15-minute task.

Photo Compression: Videos Aren't the Only Problem

Most traditional video compressors only handle video. But photos also consume significant storage—especially ProRAW photos (25 MB each), Live Photos (double the size of stills), and burst sequences (10-50 shots per burst).

HEVCut compresses both videos and photos, providing a single tool for your entire media library. Photo compression converts images to more efficient formats while preserving full visual quality.

The Ad Experience

This matters more than it should, but it's reality. Many traditional compressors are free-to-download with aggressive ad monetization. Full-screen video ads play after every compression. Banner ads cover controls. "Watch an ad to unlock HD" gates basic functionality.

The ad-supported model creates a perverse incentive: the longer you spend in the app, the more ads the developer serves. This discourages efficiency. Batch processing, fast encoding, and streamlined workflows would reduce ad impressions—so these features aren't prioritized.

HEVCut uses a subscription model with no ads. The incentive aligns with yours: compress efficiently and move on.

When a Traditional Compressor Is Fine

Traditional compressors aren't worthless. They work well for specific, limited use cases:

• One-off sharing: You need to shrink a single video to email or text it. A simple export-and-share flow works fine.
• Format conversion: You need to convert a video to a specific format for a specific platform.
• Basic trimming + compression: You want to cut a clip and compress it in one step.

If you're compressing fewer than 5 videos per month and don't care about metadata, a traditional compressor gets the job done.

FAQ

Are traditional video compressors bad?

Not inherently. They're just designed for a different use case—compressing individual videos for sharing. If you need to manage storage across your entire library, they're the wrong tool for the job.

Why do traditional compressors strip metadata?

Most use generic encoding libraries that don't integrate with Apple's Photos framework. When a video is exported through these libraries, platform-specific metadata (dates, location, HDR info) isn't carried over because the library doesn't know it exists.

Can I get the same results as HEVCut with a free app?

Partially. Some free apps support HEVC encoding. But the combination of hardware acceleration, metadata preservation, batch processing, library integration, and no ads is difficult to find in a free app because these features require significant development investment.

How much more space does HEVCut save compared to traditional compressors?

On average, 30-50% more savings. A traditional compressor using H.264 might shrink a video by 20-30%. HEVCut using HEVC typically achieves 50-70% on the same video, because the codec itself is twice as efficient.

Is the quality difference noticeable?

At similar file sizes, HEVC produces noticeably better quality than H.264. At HEVCut's balanced settings (which produce smaller files than H.264 high quality), the visual quality is comparable or better. The quality difference is most apparent in high-motion scenes and fine detail.