Yes, it is true that there is difference. I'm not sure about JVM implementation details but the reason the comment says "virtual and interface" calls is to outl

Yes, it is true that there is difference. I'm not sure about JVM implementation details but the reason the comment says "virtual and interface" calls is to outline it. Virtual calls in .NET are sufficiently close[0] to virtual calls in C++. Interface calls, however, are coded differently[1]. Also you are correct - virtual calls are not terribly expensive, but they encroach on ever limited* CPU resources like indirect jump and load predictors and, as noted in parent comments, block inlining, which is highly undesirable. [0] https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/5111fdc0dc464f01647d6b6078342f451bf3a499/src/coreclr/vm/amd64/virtualcallstubcpu.hpp#L471-L505 https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/5111fdc0dc464f01647d6... [1] https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/docs/design/coreclr/botr/virtual-stub-dispatch.md https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/docs/design/core... (mind you, the text was initially written 18 years ago, wow) * through great effort of our industry to take back whatever performance wins each generation brings with even more abstractions that fail to improve our productivity