以下是Android开发团队对两者差异的简要分析:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZOf3pOAM6A

The result is that there is a difference, and in very restrained environments with very large lists it could be a noticeable difference. In their testing, the for each loop took twice as long. However, their testing was over an arraylist of 400,000 integers. The actual difference per element in the array was 6 microseconds. I haven't tested and they didn't say, but I would expect the difference to be slightly larger using objects rather than primitives, but even still unless you are building library code where you have no idea the scale of what you will be asked to iterate over, I think the difference is not worth stressing about.

摘自Joshua Bloch的《Effective Java》第46条:

The for-each loop, introduced in release 1.5, gets rid of the clutter and the opportunity for error by hiding the iterator or index variable completely. The resulting idiom applies equally to collections and arrays: // The preferred idiom for iterating over collections and arrays for (Element e : elements) { doSomething(e); } When you see the colon (:), read it as “in.” Thus, the loop above reads as “for each element e in elements.” Note that there is no performance penalty for using the for-each loop, even for arrays. In fact, it may offer a slight performance advantage over an ordinary for loop in some circumstances, as it computes the limit of the array index only once. While you can do this by hand (Item 45), programmers don’t always do so.

即使使用像ArrayList或Vector这样的东西，其中“get”是一个简单的数组查找，第二个循环仍然有第一个循环没有的额外开销。我预计它会比第一次慢一点。

以下是Android开发团队对两者差异的简要分析:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MZOf3pOAM6A

The result is that there is a difference, and in very restrained environments with very large lists it could be a noticeable difference. In their testing, the for each loop took twice as long. However, their testing was over an arraylist of 400,000 integers. The actual difference per element in the array was 6 microseconds. I haven't tested and they didn't say, but I would expect the difference to be slightly larger using objects rather than primitives, but even still unless you are building library code where you have no idea the scale of what you will be asked to iterate over, I think the difference is not worth stressing about.

在我看来，其他答案都是基于错误的基准测试，没有考虑Hotspot的编译和优化过程。

简短的回答

尽可能使用增强循环，因为大多数时候它是最快的。 如果不能，如果可能的话，将整个数组拉到一个局部变量中:

int localArray = this.array;
for (int i = 0; i < localArray.length; i++) { 
    methodCall(localArray[i]); 
}

长回答

现在，通常没有区别，因为Hotspot非常擅长优化和消除java需要做的检查。

但有时一些优化就是无法完成，通常是因为在循环中有一个虚拟调用，不能内联。 在这种情况下，有些循环确实比其他循环快。

Java需要做的一些事情:

重新加载。数组——因为它可以被改变(通过调用或另一个线程) 检查i是否在数组的边界内，如果不是抛出IndexOutOfBoundsException 检查被访问对象引用是否为空，如果是则抛出NullPointerException异常

考虑一下这个c风格的循环:

for (int i = 0; i < this.array.length; i++) { //now java knows i < this.array.length
    methodCall(this.array[i]);// no need to check
}

通过计算循环条件i < this.array。长度，Java知道I必须在边界内(I只在调用后更改)，所以不需要在下一行中再次检查它。 但在这种情况下，java需要重新加载this.array.length。

你可能会想通过将this.array.length值拉到局部变量内部来“优化”循环:

int len = this.array.length;//len is now a local variable
for (int i = 0; i < len; i++) { //no reload needed
    methodCall(this.array[i]); //now java will do the check
}

现在java不需要每次都重新加载，因为局部变量可以被methodCall和/或另一个线程改变。局部变量只能在方法本身内部更改，java现在可以证明变量len不能更改。

但是现在循环条件i < this.array.length变为i < len，之前的优化失败，java需要检查i in是否在this.array的边界内。

一个更好的优化方法是将整个数组拉入一个局部变量:

ArrayType[] localArray = this.array;
for (int i = 0; i < localArray.length; i++) { 
    methodCall(localArray[i]); 
}

现在java不需要重新加载数组，“i in bounds”检查也被取消了。

那强化循环呢? 好吧，通常编译器会把增强的循环重写成类似上次显示的循环的东西，如果不是更好的话。

Accepted answer回答了这个问题，除了ArrayList…

因为大多数开发人员都依赖于ArrayList(至少我是这么认为的)

所以我有义务在这里加上正确答案。

直接从开发人员文档:-

增强的for循环(有时也称为“for-each”循环)可用于实现Iterable接口的集合和数组。对于集合，会分配一个迭代器来对hasNext()和next()进行接口调用。使用ArrayList，手工编写的计数循环大约快3倍(有或没有JIT)，但对于其他集合，增强的for循环语法将完全等同于显式迭代器的使用。

有几种迭代数组的方法:

static class Foo {
    int mSplat;
}

Foo[] mArray = ...

public void zero() {
    int sum = 0;
    for (int i = 0; i < mArray.length; ++i) {
        sum += mArray[i].mSplat;
    }
}

public void one() {
    int sum = 0;
    Foo[] localArray = mArray;
    int len = localArray.length;

    for (int i = 0; i < len; ++i) {
        sum += localArray[i].mSplat;
    }
}

public void two() {
    int sum = 0;
    for (Foo a : mArray) {
        sum += a.mSplat;
    }
}

zero()是最慢的，因为JIT还不能优化掉每次循环迭代获取数组长度的成本。

一个()比较快。它将所有内容提取到局部变量中，避免了查找。只有数组长度能带来性能上的好处。

two()对于没有JIT的设备来说是最快的，对于有JIT的设备来说与one()是没有区别的。它使用Java编程语言1.5版中引入的增强for循环语法。

因此，默认情况下您应该使用增强的for循环，但是可以考虑使用手写的计数循环来进行性能关键的ArrayList迭代。