Skip to Content

Quantum Computers Finally Go Head-to-Head

Researchers have directly tested two competing quantum computing technologies against each other for the first time.
February 21, 2017
An IBM quantum chip.

In the red corner, weighing in with just five qubits, a quantum computer from the University of Maryland in College Park. In the blue corner, also with five qubits, its rival from IBM. Welcome to the first fair quantum computer fight.

Researchers have described a series of experiments that, for the first time, saw two quantum computing devices, built using different underlying technologies, run the same algorithms to establish which would win. The qubits—the quantum equivalent of binary bits—in IBM’s chip are made from superconducting metals, while the University of Maryland’s uses electromagnetic fields to trap ytterbium ions.

The experiment was made possible because the two chips, while using different underlying physics, both run algorithms in the same way. And because IBM has opened its chip up, allowing it to be programmed online by researchers, the University of Maryland team was able to give it the same challenge as its own device. 

Ultimately, the IBM device was faster—but it was also less reliable. That’s because the University of Maryland device uses qubits that are all interconnected, which means they can all share information with each other. IBM’s, meanwhile, must swap information via a central hub, and that process can cause delicate quantum states to be destroyed.

The chips are still modest in power, and the results don't yet prove that one of the two technologies will win out. But the ability to directly compare their abilities will become even more useful in the future, as researchers seek to whittle down a broad field of competing quantum approaches to find the best.

In the past, quantum computers have been pitted against regular hardware, rather than their quantum rivals. Notably, D-Wave’s controversial device has been tested against normal silicon processors on several occasions, and shown to be far faster—at a handful of very specific tasks.

As Science notes, the results of the new test are perhaps less exciting than their symbolic nature. In the past, it’s not been possible to directly compare the performance of quantum devices in this way. The fact it can now be done is another sign that quantum computing nudges ever closer to reality.

(Read more: arXiv, Science, “IBM Shows Off a Quantum Computing Chip,” “Google Says It Has Proved Its Controversial Quantum Computer Really Works,” “Can a Powerful New Quantum Computer Convince the Skeptics?

Keep Reading

Most Popular

open sourcing language models concept
open sourcing language models concept

Meta has built a massive new language AI—and it’s giving it away for free

Facebook’s parent company is inviting researchers to pore over and pick apart the flaws in its version of GPT-3

transplant surgery
transplant surgery

The gene-edited pig heart given to a dying patient was infected with a pig virus

The first transplant of a genetically-modified pig heart into a human may have ended prematurely because of a well-known—and avoidable—risk.

Muhammad bin Salman funds anti-aging research
Muhammad bin Salman funds anti-aging research

Saudi Arabia plans to spend $1 billion a year discovering treatments to slow aging

The oil kingdom fears that its population is aging at an accelerated rate and hopes to test drugs to reverse the problem. First up might be the diabetes drug metformin.

Yann LeCun
Yann LeCun

Yann LeCun has a bold new vision for the future of AI

One of the godfathers of deep learning pulls together old ideas to sketch out a fresh path for AI, but raises as many questions as he answers.

Stay connected

Illustration by Rose WongIllustration by Rose Wong

Get the latest updates from
MIT Technology Review

Discover special offers, top stories, upcoming events, and more.

Thank you for submitting your email!

Explore more newsletters

It looks like something went wrong.

We’re having trouble saving your preferences. Try refreshing this page and updating them one more time. If you continue to get this message, reach out to us at customer-service@technologyreview.com with a list of newsletters you’d like to receive.