Quantum Supercomputer

[KAL 9000]

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

[peadar1987]

14 minutes ago, KAL 9000 said:

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

Fast

[Darnok]

50 minutes ago, KAL 9000 said:

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

If you are going to use it for simple calculations like 2+2 it will be slow

[PB666]

6 hours ago, KAL 9000 said:

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

Potentially quantum computers could do what supercomputers could do but much more cheaply. Right now the bigger problem with quantum computing is linking large number of qubits together, if the typical quantum computer is limited to a few qubits and power is limited to 2^qubits. The grand problem is heat related quantum decoherance, not to much of a problem with a few qubits because one can recycle, but when the size of the problem and number of qubits grows, the recycling effort becomes astronomically more expensive timewise and eventually becomes completely unproductive. So if the problem is really big, supercomputers are still better, if the problem can be broken down into say size 8 or 16 and can be done on several computers it could be done more quickly.

One example is suppose you want to know what the probability of an a large number of events, you could bin the probabilities and do a low resolution test on each. If the test result fell into a range you didn't care about about refinement, either very probable or highly improbable you could toss it aside and move on, but if you found it in a marginal region, then you would pipe to the supercomputer to do refined analysis. The problem is that the number of problems that could be solved like this are few.

 

 

[K^2]

The above is essentially accurate. The only thing I can add is that if you narrow the task, and build a highly-specialized quantum computer, you can sometimes dramatically reduce decoherence problems. D-Wave Systems QCs are a good example of that. They run a Quantum Annealing optimization algorithm with up to 512-qubits. This is pretty much junk for general computing, but problems that can be solved by simulated annealing, such as some very interesting machine learning problems, are absolutely perfect for it. And a single QC chip can actually compete with a small supercomputer cluster when limited to these sorts of problems. It also costs like a small supercomputer, sure, but the main expense of running clusters is actually power consumption, and that's where QCs win hands-down.

[Turf]

On 20/4/2016 at 9:50 PM, KAL 9000 said:

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

Could this computer beat one human brain? Or ALL human brains in the world combined?

[cubinator]

On 4/20/2016 at 10:04 AM, peadar1987 said:

Fast

@Sanic fast?

[Spaceception]

On 4/20/2016 at 7:50 AM, KAL 9000 said:

If a supercomputer is several computers linked together that can solve problems incredibly fast, and a quantum computer is faster than a supercomputer, how fast a computer would you create if you linked several quantum computers together like a supercomputer?

This fast.

Edited April 22, 2016 by Spaceception

[Atlas2342]

8 hours ago, Anbang11 said:

Could this computer beat one human brain? Or ALL human brains in the world combined?

Well, a midrange mobile phone processor can do calculations approx. 70× faster than all of human brains combined but its an unfair comparison. Humans are good with understanding humans but computers are not...thats because human brains have millenia of evolution programmed in there. Go humans!

Source: What If- Randall Munroe (good read)

[Turf]

On 20/4/2016 at 10:04 PM, peadar1987 said:

Fast

Well, it was going pretty fast, until someone used it to divide by zero....

 

[Sanic]

2 hours ago, cubinator said:

@Sanic fast?

actual2fast

 

 

sorry

Edited April 23, 2016 by Sanic

[cubinator]

Aaand back to the topic of quantum supercomputers. I can't say much on the topic, but it seems like a good idea.

[Atlas2342]

7 hours ago, Sanic said:

 

 

What did i just watch?

[RA3236]

15 hours ago, Atlas2342 said:

What did i just watch?

I know. People these days. No offence, Sanic  

On topic, this computer must be very fast.

Maybe.  

[James Kerman]

It is likely to be at least a decade until quantum computing gets out of the lab.  I think the next real jump in computing is what the AI researchers call the "Technological Singularity" and will most likely come about through neural networks.  Will they be as fast as Sanic? Who knows?

[justidutch]

The AI singularity, as I understand it, will be the last 'jump' in computing (and perhaps everything).  After that it becomes innovation and discovery at a near infinitely fast rate, and no one knows what happens at that point.  If we can manage to live another 40 years, we should be around to see it.

Edited April 26, 2016 by justidutch