In general these are mostly the same other than being explicit about the object's monitor that's being used vs the implicit this object. One downside of synchronized methods that I think is sometimes overlooked is that in using the "this" reference to synchronize on you are leaving open the possibility of external objects locking on the same object. That can be a very subtle bug if you run into it. Synchronizing on an internal explicit Object or other existing field can avoid this issue, completely encapsulating the synchronization.

唯一的区别是:同步块允许颗粒状锁定，不像同步方法

基本上同步块或方法被用来编写线程安全的代码，以避免内存不一致的错误。

这个问题很老了，在过去的7年里，很多事情都发生了变化。 为了线程安全，引入了新的编程结构。

您可以通过使用高级并发API而不是同步块来实现线程安全。该文档页提供了实现线程安全的良好编程结构。

锁对象支持简化许多并发应用程序的锁定习惯用法。

executor为启动和管理线程定义了高级API。concurrent提供的执行器实现提供了适合大型应用程序的线程池管理。

并发集合使管理大型数据集合变得更容易，并且可以大大减少同步的需要。

原子变量具有最小化同步和帮助避免内存一致性错误的特性。

ThreadLocalRandom(在JDK 7中)提供了从多个线程有效生成伪随机数的功能。

更好的synchronized替代品是ReentrantLock，它使用Lock API

一个可重入互斥锁，其基本行为和语义与使用同步方法和语句访问的隐式监视锁相同，但具有扩展功能。

锁的例子:

class X {
   private final ReentrantLock lock = new ReentrantLock();
   // ...

   public void m() {
     lock.lock();  // block until condition holds
     try {
       // ... method body
     } finally {
       lock.unlock()
     }
   }
 }

其他编程结构也可以参考java.util.concurrent和java.util.concurrent.atomic包。

参考这个相关的问题:

同步vs锁定

来自Java规范摘要: http://www.cs.cornell.edu/andru/javaspec/17.doc.html

The synchronized statement (§14.17) computes a reference to an object; it then attempts to perform a lock action on that object and does not proceed further until the lock action has successfully completed. ... A synchronized method (§8.4.3.5) automatically performs a lock action when it is invoked; its body is not executed until the lock action has successfully completed. If the method is an instance method, it locks the lock associated with the instance for which it was invoked (that is, the object that will be known as this during execution of the body of the method). If the method is static, it locks the lock associated with the Class object that represents the class in which the method is defined. ...

基于这些描述，我想说以前的大多数答案都是正确的，同步方法可能对静态方法特别有用，否则您必须弄清楚如何获得“表示定义方法的类的Class对象”。

编辑:我原本以为这些是对实际Java规范的引用。澄清一下，本页只是对规范的总结/解释

我知道这是一个老问题，但通过快速阅读这里的回答，我并没有看到任何人提到同步方法有时可能是错误的锁。 摘自Java并发实践(第72页):

public class ListHelper<E> {
  public List<E> list = Collections.syncrhonizedList(new ArrayList<>());
...

public syncrhonized boolean putIfAbsent(E x) {
 boolean absent = !list.contains(x);
if(absent) {
 list.add(x);
}
return absent;
}

上面的代码看起来是线程安全的。然而，现实并非如此。在这种情况下，锁在类的实例上获得。但是，该列表可能被另一个不使用该方法的线程修改。正确的方法是使用

public boolean putIfAbsent(E x) {
 synchronized(list) {
  boolean absent = !list.contains(x);
  if(absent) {
    list.add(x);
  }
  return absent;
}
}

上面的代码将阻止所有试图修改list的线程修改列表，直到同步块完成。

In general these are mostly the same other than being explicit about the object's monitor that's being used vs the implicit this object. One downside of synchronized methods that I think is sometimes overlooked is that in using the "this" reference to synchronize on you are leaving open the possibility of external objects locking on the same object. That can be a very subtle bug if you run into it. Synchronizing on an internal explicit Object or other existing field can avoid this issue, completely encapsulating the synchronization.

As already said here synchronized block can use user-defined variable as lock object, when synchronized function uses only "this". And of course you can manipulate with areas of your function which should be synchronized. But everyone says that no difference between synchronized function and block which covers whole function using "this" as lock object. That is not true, difference is in byte code which will be generated in both situations. In case of synchronized block usage should be allocated local variable which holds reference to "this". And as result we will have a little bit larger size for function (not relevant if you have only few number of functions).

你可以在这里找到更详细的解释: http://www.artima.com/insidejvm/ed2/threadsynchP.html