Java Native Access Performance

A coffee beans with computer DVI socket in it

This is a remake of java-native-benchmark: performance benchmark of different ways (libraries) of using native libraries. The original benchmark was created for Windows, and I’m more interested in Linux. I tried to fork the original repo, but I failed to make gradle work with IntelliJ, so I created with in my own bazel (ironical, yes) repo.

In the nearest future I’m going to run a more sophisticated benchmark for native calls.

What Are We Benchmarking?

In the original benchmark function GetSystemTime from Windows API was called. On Linux I decided to go with the simpler one: getloadavg from libc.

Tested libraries:

I didn’t use Panama as it requires too much of an effort. If you’re interested, there is a very good long tutorial.


Benchmark is very simple and straight-forward. The fastest access is via JNI, JNR and JavaCPP. Interestingly enough, JMX is slower than JNI, which is a little bit unexpected.

A bar chart for all JDK versions

JNI empty just shows a baseline, which is about 22 nanoseconds on my laptop. Seemingly, not a huge overhead (for a simple function that takes int and returns it back).

However, if we will compare it with a native benchmark, in which getloadavg takes approximately 470 nanoseconds. Then the actual overhead in this scenario vs the best result of 794 nanoseconds would be 300+ nanoseconds.


A call to a native library is not cheap. But still might be beneficial comparing to JDK in terms of performance. JNI has a similar performance to JNR-FFI and JavaCPP, but requires to write a native library using jni.h or jni crate for Rust.

Play with charts here. Source code is on GitHub.



Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store
Dmitry Komanov

Dmitry Komanov


Software developer, moved to Israel from Russia, trying to be aware of things.