In short, Cray is not pursuing any kind of quantum strategy at the moment following a detailed evaluation.The article goes on to explain that even if all those things are accomplished in the next 20 years, the quantum computers will still be no substitute for Cray supercomputers.
“We are probably five-plus years from the first demonstration of quantum beating a classical computer on a contrived problem—one that highlights capability but not problems people are actually trying to solve. We are probably ten-plus years from practical quantum advantage where quantum is the most effective and cost-effective way to solve an actual problem. And we are at least 15-20 years away from having algorithms with strong advantage. There are a variety of algorithms that require reliable qubits and a large number of them, but we are a long way from having that,” Scott argues.
I am skeptical that quantum computers will be a threat to anything, but we shall soon see.
That's Steve Scott at Cray, not Scott Aaronson. LOL.ReplyDelete
Yes, we definitely need to spend billions on computers that can add 1 plus 1... and almost but not quite get 2, this will be a game changer.ReplyDelete
Think of all the children... doing sums incorrectly who are quaking in terror at being supplanted by a machine that can do incorrect sums more quickly than they can.
Happy April fools day.