Worrying about my web application's performances, I am wondering which of "if/else" or switch statement is better regarding performance?
-
6Do you have any reason to think the same bytecode is not generated for the two constructs? – Pascal Cuoq Jan 18 '10 at 14:13
-
2@Pascal: there might be optimization done by using table look-ups instead of a list of `if` etc. – jldupont Jan 18 '10 at 14:20
-
21"Premature optimization is the root of all evil" - Donald Knuth – missingfaktor Jan 18 '10 at 14:38
-
116While this is *definitely* premature optimization, "Mindless adherence to a quote taken badly out of context is the reason we need a high-end multi-core computer just to display a reasonably responsive GUI today" - Me. – Lawrence Dol Jan 18 '10 at 19:58
-
These questions will never stop. – Kevin Bourrillion Jan 19 '10 at 21:13
-
3Knuth has a precise mind. Please note the qualifier "premature". Optimization is a perfectly valid concern. That said, a server is IO bound and the bottlenecks of network and disk I/O are orders of magnitude more significant than anything else you have going on in your server. – alphazero Apr 25 '11 at 02:14
-
You should give [this](http://msmvps.com/blogs/jon_skeet/archive/2009/11/16/just-how-spiky-is-your-traffic.aspx) a read. – Leo Jweda Jan 18 '10 at 14:47
-
@PascalCuoq `javap` and the `javac` source code: http://stackoverflow.com/a/31032054/895245 – Ciro Santilli OurBigBook.com Jun 24 '15 at 16:36
-
Try using caliper to microbenchmark your code. If you're doing it for optimization then I would agree with the sentiment of others that it isn't a good idea, but as an educational exercise it would be nice to see. Check https://trajano.net/2014/08/microbenchmarking-repeated-characters-in-java/ for an example – Archimedes Trajano May 10 '17 at 18:06
-
@LawrenceDol This question is a decade late but is there a story you're referring to with the high-end computer GUI comment? – Emmanuel Jun 23 '21 at 12:18
-
@Emmanuel : No story. Just making the counterpoint to the Knuth quote which, as usual, is stripped of its context and used as a blunt excuse to write crappy code. – Lawrence Dol Jun 24 '21 at 17:07
10 Answers
I totally agree with the opinion that premature optimization is something to avoid.
But it's true that the Java VM has special bytecodes which could be used for switch()'s.
See WM Spec (lookupswitch and tableswitch)
So there could be some performance gains, if the code is part of the performance CPU graph.
-
66I wonder why this comment isn't rated higher: it is the most informitive of all of them. I mean: we all already know about premature optimalization being bad and such, no need to explain that for the 1000th time. – Folkert van Heusden Jul 01 '12 at 16:42
-
7+1 As of http://stackoverflow.com/a/15621602/89818 it seems the performance gains are really there, and you should see an advantage if you use 18+ cases. – caw May 25 '14 at 01:32
That's micro optimization and premature optimization, which are evil. Rather worry about readabililty and maintainability of the code in question. If there are more than two if/else
blocks glued together or its size is unpredictable, then you may highly consider a switch
statement.
Alternatively, you can also grab Polymorphism. First create some interface:
public interface Action {
void execute(String input);
}
And get hold of all implementations in some Map
. You can do this either statically or dynamically:
Map<String, Action> actions = new HashMap<String, Action>();
Finally replace the if/else
or switch
by something like this (leaving trivial checks like nullpointers aside):
actions.get(name).execute(input);
It might be microslower than if/else
or switch
, but the code is at least far better maintainable.
As you're talking about webapplications, you can make use of HttpServletRequest#getPathInfo()
as action key (eventually write some more code to split the last part of pathinfo away in a loop until an action is found). You can find here similar answers:
- Using a custom Servlet oriented framework, too many servlets, is this an issue
- Java Front Controller
If you're worrying about Java EE webapplication performance in general, then you may find this article useful as well. There are other areas which gives a much more performance gain than only (micro)optimizing the raw Java code.
-
1
-
That's indeed more recommended in case of "unpredictable" amount of if/else blocks. – BalusC Jan 18 '10 at 14:23
-
81I'm not so quick to dismiss all early optimization as "evil". Being too aggressive is foolish, but when faced with constructs of comparable readability choosing one known to perform better is an appropriate decision. – Brian Knoblauch Jan 18 '10 at 14:49
-
11The HashMap lookup version can easily be 10 times slower compared to a tableswitsch instruction. I wouldn't call this "microslower"! – x4u Jan 18 '10 at 15:20
-
-
12I'm interested in actually knowing the inner workings of Java in the general case with switch statements - I'm not interested in whether or not somebody thinks this is related to over-prioritizing early optimization. That being said, I have absolutely no idea why this answer is upvoted so much and why it is the accepted answer...this does nothing to answer the initial question. – searchengine27 May 04 '15 at 12:19
It's extremely unlikely that an if/else or a switch is going to be the source of your performance woes. If you're having performance problems, you should do a performance profiling analysis first to determine where the slow spots are. Premature optimization is the root of all evil!
Nevertheless, it's possible to talk about the relative performance of switch vs. if/else with the Java compiler optimizations. First note that in Java, switch statements operate on a very limited domain -- integers. In general, you can view a switch statement as follows:
switch (<condition>) {
case c_0: ...
case c_1: ...
...
case c_n: ...
default: ...
}
where c_0
, c_1
, ..., and c_N
are integral numbers that are targets of the switch statement, and <condition>
must resolve to an integer expression.
If this set is "dense" -- that is, (max(ci) + 1 - min(ci)) / n > α, where 0 < k < α < 1, where
k
is larger than some empirical value, a jump table can be generated, which is highly efficient.If this set is not very dense, but n >= β, a binary search tree can find the target in O(2 * log(n)) which is still efficient too.
For all other cases, a switch statement is exactly as efficient as the equivalent series of if/else statements. The precise values of α and β depend on a number of factors and are determined by the compiler's code-optimization module.
Finally, of course, if the domain of <condition>
is not the integers, a switch
statement is completely useless.

- 303,634
- 46
- 339
- 357
-
+1. There is a good chance that time spent on network I/O is easily eclipsing this particular issue. – Adam Paynter Jan 18 '10 at 14:13
-
4It should be noted that switches work with more than just ints. From the Java Tutorials: "A switch works with the byte, short, char, and int primitive data types. It also works with enumerated types (discussed in Enum Types), the String class, and a few special classes that wrap certain primitive types: Character, Byte, Short, and Integer (discussed in Numbers and Strings)." Support for String is more recent addition; added in Java 7. http://docs.oracle.com/javase/tutorial/java/nutsandbolts/switch.html – atraudes Sep 11 '14 at 19:49
-
1@jhonFeminella Could you please compare BIG O notion effects for Java7 String in Swtich compared to String in if / else if ..? – Kanagavelu Sugumar Nov 19 '14 at 10:57
-
More precisely, javac 8 gives a weight of 3 to time complexity over space complexity: http://stackoverflow.com/a/31032054/895245 – Ciro Santilli OurBigBook.com Jun 24 '15 at 16:37
Use switch!
I hate to maintain if-else-blocks! Have a test:
public class SpeedTestSwitch
{
private static void do1(int loop)
{
int temp = 0;
for (; loop > 0; --loop)
{
int r = (int) (Math.random() * 10);
switch (r)
{
case 0:
temp = 9;
break;
case 1:
temp = 8;
break;
case 2:
temp = 7;
break;
case 3:
temp = 6;
break;
case 4:
temp = 5;
break;
case 5:
temp = 4;
break;
case 6:
temp = 3;
break;
case 7:
temp = 2;
break;
case 8:
temp = 1;
break;
case 9:
temp = 0;
break;
}
}
System.out.println("ignore: " + temp);
}
private static void do2(int loop)
{
int temp = 0;
for (; loop > 0; --loop)
{
int r = (int) (Math.random() * 10);
if (r == 0)
temp = 9;
else
if (r == 1)
temp = 8;
else
if (r == 2)
temp = 7;
else
if (r == 3)
temp = 6;
else
if (r == 4)
temp = 5;
else
if (r == 5)
temp = 4;
else
if (r == 6)
temp = 3;
else
if (r == 7)
temp = 2;
else
if (r == 8)
temp = 1;
else
if (r == 9)
temp = 0;
}
System.out.println("ignore: " + temp);
}
public static void main(String[] args)
{
long time;
int loop = 1 * 100 * 1000 * 1000;
System.out.println("warming up...");
do1(loop / 100);
do2(loop / 100);
System.out.println("start");
// run 1
System.out.println("switch:");
time = System.currentTimeMillis();
do1(loop);
System.out.println(" -> time needed: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - time));
// run 2
System.out.println("if/else:");
time = System.currentTimeMillis();
do2(loop);
System.out.println(" -> time needed: " + (System.currentTimeMillis() - time));
}
}

- 1
- 1

- 13,162
- 17
- 86
- 124
-
Could you please (sometime) elaborate a bit on how you did benchmark this? – DerMike May 05 '14 at 11:47
-
Thank you very much for your update. I mean, they differ by one order of magnitude - wich is possible of course. Are you sure that the compiler did not just optimze the `switch`es away? – DerMike May 05 '14 at 12:52
-
@DerMike I don't remember how I got the old results. I got very different today. But try it yourself and let me know how it turns out. – Bitterblue May 05 '14 at 13:58
-
1when i run it on my laptop ; switch time needed: 3585, if/else time needed: 3458 so if/else is better :) or not worse – halil Apr 22 '15 at 09:32
-
@halil 2nd sentence of [the accepted answer](http://stackoverflow.com/a/2086546/1442225) is absolutely right. In your case I would take switch anyways. The times aren't that different. – Bitterblue Apr 27 '15 at 09:25
-
-
2The dominant cost in the test is the random number generation. I modified the test to generate the random number before the loop, and used the temp value to feed back into r. The switch is then almost twice as fast as the if-else chain. – boneill Jun 22 '16 at 02:38
-
Inaccurate.., the random number should be generated before and same one should be fed to both the methods. – AmeyaB Feb 24 '17 at 08:41
-
As others remarked, random is costly and hides differences in performance. I replaced int r = (int) (Math.random() * 10); with int r = (loop & 0b11111) != 0b0 ? 0 : loop % 10; and got that the if/else is three times as fast as the switch, which shows it also depends on the distribution of your data. – D. L. Apr 09 '17 at 15:17
In my test the better performance is ENUM > MAP > SWITCH > IF/ELSE IF in Windows7.
import java.util.HashMap;
import java.util.Map;
public class StringsInSwitch {
public static void main(String[] args) {
String doSomething = null;
//METHOD_1 : SWITCH
long start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 99999999; i++) {
String input = "Hello World" + (i & 0xF);
switch (input) {
case "Hello World0":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World1":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World2":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World3":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World4":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World5":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World6":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World7":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World8":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World9":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World10":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World11":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World12":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World13":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World14":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
case "Hello World15":
doSomething = "Hello World0";
break;
}
}
System.out.println("Time taken for String in Switch :"+ (System.currentTimeMillis() - start));
//METHOD_2 : IF/ELSE IF
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 99999999; i++) {
String input = "Hello World" + (i & 0xF);
if(input.equals("Hello World0")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World1")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World2")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World3")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World4")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World5")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World6")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World7")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World8")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World9")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World10")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World11")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World12")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World13")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World14")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
} else if(input.equals("Hello World15")){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
}
}
System.out.println("Time taken for String in if/else if :"+ (System.currentTimeMillis() - start));
//METHOD_3 : MAP
//Create and build Map
Map<String, ExecutableClass> map = new HashMap<String, ExecutableClass>();
for (int i = 0; i <= 15; i++) {
String input = "Hello World" + (i & 0xF);
map.put(input, new ExecutableClass(){
public void execute(String doSomething){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
}
});
}
//Start test map
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 99999999; i++) {
String input = "Hello World" + (i & 0xF);
map.get(input).execute(doSomething);
}
System.out.println("Time taken for String in Map :"+ (System.currentTimeMillis() - start));
//METHOD_4 : ENUM (This doesn't use muliple string with space.)
start = System.currentTimeMillis();
for (int i = 0; i < 99999999; i++) {
String input = "HW" + (i & 0xF);
HelloWorld.valueOf(input).execute(doSomething);
}
System.out.println("Time taken for String in ENUM :"+ (System.currentTimeMillis() - start));
}
}
interface ExecutableClass
{
public void execute(String doSomething);
}
// Enum version
enum HelloWorld {
HW0("Hello World0"), HW1("Hello World1"), HW2("Hello World2"), HW3(
"Hello World3"), HW4("Hello World4"), HW5("Hello World5"), HW6(
"Hello World6"), HW7("Hello World7"), HW8("Hello World8"), HW9(
"Hello World9"), HW10("Hello World10"), HW11("Hello World11"), HW12(
"Hello World12"), HW13("Hello World13"), HW14("Hello World4"), HW15(
"Hello World15");
private String name = null;
private HelloWorld(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void execute(String doSomething){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
}
public static HelloWorld fromString(String input) {
for (HelloWorld hw : HelloWorld.values()) {
if (input.equals(hw.getName())) {
return hw;
}
}
return null;
}
}
//Enum version for betterment on coding format compare to interface ExecutableClass
enum HelloWorld1 {
HW0("Hello World0") {
public void execute(String doSomething){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
}
},
HW1("Hello World1"){
public void execute(String doSomething){
doSomething = "Hello World0";
}
};
private String name = null;
private HelloWorld1(String name) {
this.name = name;
}
public String getName() {
return name;
}
public void execute(String doSomething){
// super call, nothing here
}
}
/*
* http://stackoverflow.com/questions/338206/why-cant-i-switch-on-a-string
* https://docs.oracle.com/javase/specs/jvms/se7/html/jvms-3.html#jvms-3.10
* http://forums.xkcd.com/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=33524
*/

- 18,766
- 20
- 94
- 101
-
`Time taken for String in Switch :3235 Time taken for String in if/else if :3143 Time taken for String in Map :4194 Time taken for String in ENUM :2866` – halil Apr 22 '15 at 09:36
-
1@halil I am not sure how this code works on different environments, but you have mentioned if/elseif is better than Switch and Map, that i am not able to convince since if/elseif has to perform more no of times equals comparison. – Kanagavelu Sugumar May 20 '15 at 11:36
According to Cliff Click in his 2009 Java One talk A Crash Course in Modern Hardware:
Today, performance is dominated by patterns of memory access. Cache misses dominate – memory is the new disk. [Slide 65]
You can get his full slides here.
Cliff gives an example (finishing on Slide 30) showing that even with the CPU doing register-renaming, branch prediction, and speculative execution, it's only able to start 7 operations in 4 clock cycles before having to block due to two cache misses which take 300 clock cycles to return.
So he says to speed up your program you shouldn't be looking at this sort of minor issue, but on larger ones such as whether you're making unnecessary data format conversions, such as converting "SOAP → XML → DOM → SQL → …" which "passes all the data through the cache".

- 30,582
- 12
- 56
- 83
I remember reading that there are 2 kinds of Switch statements in Java bytecode. (I think it was in 'Java Performance Tuning' One is a very fast implementation which uses the switch statement's integer values to know the offset of the code to be executed. This would require all integers to be consecutive and in a well-defined range. I'm guessing that using all the values of an Enum would fall in that category too.
I agree with many other posters though... it may be premature to worry about this, unless this is very very hot code.

- 1,527
- 4
- 19
- 36
-
4+1 for the hot code comment. If its in your main loop its not premature. – KingAndrew Feb 04 '14 at 23:56
-
Yes, *javac* implements `switch` several different ways, some more efficient than others. In general, the efficiency will be no worse than a straight-forward "`if` ladder", but there are enough variations (especially with the JITC) that it's hard to be much more precise than that. – Hot Licks Nov 19 '14 at 12:40
For most switch
and most if-then-else
blocks, I can't imagine that there are any appreciable or significant performance related concerns.
But here's the thing: if you're using a switch
block, its very use suggests that you're switching on a value taken from a set of constants known at compile time. In this case, you really shouldn't be using switch
statements at all if you can use an enum
with constant-specific methods.
Compared to a switch
statement, an enum provides better type safety and code that is easier to maintain. Enums can be designed so that if a constant is added to the set of constants, your code won't compile without providing a constant-specific method for the new value. On the other hand, forgetting to add a new case
to a switch
block can sometimes only be caught at run time if you're lucky enough to have set your block up to throw an exception.
Performance between switch
and an enum
constant-specific method should not be significantly different, but the latter is more readable, safer, and easier to maintain.

- 9,908
- 3
- 40
- 56
A good explanation at the link below:
https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/switch-vs-else/
Test(c++17)
1 - If grouped
2 - If sequential
3 - Goto Array
4 - Switch Case - Jump Table
https://onlinegdb.com/Su7HNEBeG

- 11
- 2
Speed: A switch statement might prove to be faster than ifs provided number of cases are good. If there are only few cases, it might not effect the speed in any case. Prefer switch if the number of cases are more than 5 otherwise, you may use if-else too. If a switch contains more than five items, it’s implemented using a lookup table or a hash list. This means that all items get the same access time, compared to a list of if:s where the last item takes much more time to reach as it has to evaluate every previous condition first. Clarity in readability: A switch looks much cleaner when you have to combine cases. Ifs are quite vulnerable to errors too. Missing an else statement can land you up in havoc. Adding/removing labels is also easier with a switch and makes your code significantly easier to change and maintain.
Example:-> String environment="QA";
switch(environment.toLowerCase().trim()) {
case "qa":
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Environment running the TestCases");
break;
case "Stage":
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Environment running the TestCases");
break;
case "Dev":
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Environment running the TestCases");
break;
case "UAT":
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Environment running the TestCases");
break;
case "Prod":
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Environment running the TestCases");
break;
default:
System.out.println(environment+" :"+"Please pass the right Environment");
break;
}
String browser="Chrome";
if (browser.equals("chrome")) {
System.out.println(browser + ": " + " Launch the Browser");
} else if (browser.equals("safari")) {
System.out.println(browser + ": " + " Launch the Browser");
} else if (browser.equals("IE")) {
System.out.println(browser + ": " + " Launch the Browser");
} else if (browser.equals("opera")) {
System.out.println(browser + ": " + " Launch the Browser");
} else if (browser.equals("Edge")) {
System.out.println(browser + ": " + " Launch the Browser");
} else {
System.out.println("Please pass the right browser");
}