0
$\begingroup$

Quantum computers are going to have enormous number of operations per second (in some situations exponentially more than classic computers).

Does it also hold for memory size? Are QC going to have exponentially increased memory?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The premise is incorrect: quantum computers don't do many operations per second. $\endgroup$ – David Richerby Sep 18 '15 at 19:53
  • $\begingroup$ @DavidRicherby: can you substantiate this statement ? $\endgroup$ – Yves Daoust Sep 18 '15 at 20:06
  • $\begingroup$ @YvesDaoust "We don’t have any computers that uncontroversially use quantum mechanics to solve a problem faster than we know how to solve the same problem using a conventional computer." -- Scott Aaronson. Given that there are problems that quantum computers can solve in many fewer operations than classical computers, the fact that classical computers still solve those problems faster implies that classical computers do many more operations per second. $\endgroup$ – David Richerby Sep 18 '15 at 21:54
7
$\begingroup$

No, quantum computers are not going to have an enormous number of operations per second, in fact they are probably going to be much slower in the foreseeable future. The situation with memory seems even bleaker – so far only a handful of bits.

The big advantage of quantum computers is that they can run quantum algorithms, which work rather differently from classical algorithms. Very informally, they provide a way of going through many possibilities at the same time. This gives an exponential speed up for some tasks, and a polynomial speedup for others – in terms of the number of operations. Even though each individual operation is going to be slower, since you need to run drastically fewer, the overall algorithm would run much faster.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.