(blog.google)

429 points AbhishekParmar | 1 comments | 22 Oct 25 15:16 UTC | HN request time: 0.206s | source

Show context

kantbtrue ◴[22 Oct 25 15:52 UTC] No.45671020[source]▶

“13,000× faster” sounds huge, but I wonder what it’s being compared to. Quantum speedups are always tricky to measure

jonathanstrange ◴[22 Oct 25 15:55 UTC] No.45671059[source]▶

The article states: “...13,000 times faster on Willow than the best classical algorithm on one of the world’s fastest supercomputers...”

I agree it's not very precise without knowing which of the world's fastest supercomputers they're talking about, but there was no need to leave out this tidbit.

replies(2): >>45671153 #>>45674702 #

jasonthorsness ◴[22 Oct 25 16:01 UTC] No.45671153[source]▶

>>45671059 #

The paper talks only about the Frontier supercomputer which is #2 on Top500. But I think it was an analysis rather than them actually running it.

replies(1): >>45671211 #

1. jonathanstrange ◴[22 Oct 25 16:04 UTC] No.45671211[source]▶

>>45671153 #

I was being sarcastic because 13,000 times faster is 4 orders of magnitude faster so it doesn't matter to which supercomputer it is compared.

↑

Willow quantum chip demonstrates verifiable quantum advantage on hardware