Why is Java faster when using a JIT vs. compiling to machine code?
The real killer for any AOT compiler is:
Class.forName(...)
This means that you cannot write a AOT compiler which covers ALL Java programs as there is information available only at runtime about the characteristics of the program. You can, however, do it on a subset of Java which is what I believe that gcj does.
Another typical example is the ability of a JIT to inline methods like getX() directly in the calling methods if it is found that it is safe to do so, and undoing it if appropriate, even if not explicitly helped by the programmer by telling that a method is final. The JIT can see that in the running program a given method is not overriden and is therefore in this instance can be treated as final. This might be different in the next invocation.
Edit 2019: Oracle has introduced GraalVM which allows AOT compilation on a subset of Java (a quite large one, but still a subset) with the primary requirement that all code is available at compile time. This allows for millisecond startup time of web containers.
Java's JIT compiler is also lazy and adaptive.
Lazy
Being lazy it only compiles methods when it gets to them instead of compiling the whole program (very useful if you don't use part of a program). Class loading actually helps make the JIT faster by allowing it to ignore classes it hasn't come across yet.
Adaptive
Being adaptive it emits a quick and dirty version of the machine code first and then only goes back and does a through job if that method is used frequently.
A JIT compiler can be faster because the machine code is being generated on the exact machine that it will also execute on. This means that the JIT has the best possible information available to it to emit optimized code.
If you pre-compile bytecode into machine code, the compiler cannot optimize for the target machine(s), only the build machine.
I will paste an interesting answer given by the James Gosling in the Book Masterminds of Programming.
Well, I’ve heard it said that effectively you have two compilers in the Java world. You have the compiler to Java bytecode, and then you have your JIT, which basically recompiles everything specifically again. All of your scary optimizations are in the JIT.
James: Exactly. These days we’re beating the really good C and C++ compilers pretty much always. When you go to the dynamic compiler, you get two advantages when the compiler’s running right at the last moment. One is you know exactly what chipset you’re running on. So many times when people are compiling a piece of C code, they have to compile it to run on kind of the generic x86 architecture. Almost none of the binaries you get are particularly well tuned for any of them. You download the latest copy of Mozilla,and it’ll run on pretty much any Intel architecture CPU. There’s pretty much one Linux binary. It’s pretty generic, and it’s compiled with GCC, which is not a very good C compiler.
When HotSpot runs, it knows exactly what chipset you’re running on. It knows exactly how the cache works. It knows exactly how the memory hierarchy works. It knows exactly how all the pipeline interlocks work in the CPU. It knows what instruction set extensions this chip has got. It optimizes for precisely what machine you’re on. Then the other half of it is that it actually sees the application as it’s running. It’s able to have statistics that know which things are important. It’s able to inline things that a C compiler could never do. The kind of stuff that gets inlined in the Java world is pretty amazing. Then you tack onto that the way the storage management works with the modern garbage collectors. With a modern garbage collector, storage allocation is extremely fast.