IBM Proves Quantum Computers Can Be Faster Than Classical Ones
IBM researchers have published a paper proving that quantum computers can indeed be faster than classical computers, something that has only be theorized so far.
Quantum Algorithm Shows Speed Advantage
One of the main promises of quantum computers has been that they can solve complex problems much faster than classical computers can. Classical computers typically require exponentially more resources and power as the number of variables increase.
IBM was able to prove, for a specific difficult algebraic problem, that quantum computers need only a fixed number of steps to solve the problem, even as the number of inputs increases. This makes the quantum computation much more efficient than the classical counterpart. The more complex the problem becomes, the more efficient the quantum computed solution should be too.
The IBM researchers Sergey Bravyi, David Gosset and Robert König said in their paper:
“We show that parallel quantum algorithms running in a constant time period are strictly more powerful than their classical counterparts; they are provably better at solving certain linear algebra problems associated with binary quadratic forms.
Our work gives an unconditional proof of a computational quantum advantage and simultaneously pinpoints its origin: It is a consequence of quantum nonlocality. The proposed quantum algorithm is a suitable candidate for nearfuture experimental realizations, as it requires only constantdepth quantum circuits with nearestneighbor gates on a twodimensional grid of qubits (quantum bits).”
Quantum Computers Showing Potential
Over the past few years, we’ve seen major technology companies such as IBM, Google, Microsoft, Intel and others race against each other to show quantum supremacy, or proof that a quantum computer can solve a task faster than any supercomputer on Earth. They have yet to achieve this result, but Google believes it will soon.
Stay On the Cutting Edge: Get the Tom's Hardware Newsletter
Get Tom's Hardware's best news and indepth reviews, straight to your inbox.
Meanwhile, what IBM showed in this paper is that quantum algorithms can indeed be faster than their classical counterparts, but this doesn’t mean that the best quantum computer we have today can be faster than our fastest classical computers, since the quantum computers have not become powerful enough.
The paper showed that quantum computers have the ability to solve some problems much more efficiently, and once they become powerful enough they will be able to solve those problems faster than any other classical computer. Other problems will likely continue to be solved by classical computers, even as quantum computers mature, because not every problem may have a highly parallelized quantum computing solution.

stdragon With quantum computing, it's like "Schrödinger's bit" where the results are already known right up until you directly observe them. Until then, it's both a 1 and a 0 at the same timeReply
:) 
alextheblue Most of these comparisons are against general purpose processors. This article doesn't say ANYTHING about the hardware in question. Pit the quantum computers against systems that accelerate work using GPUs and other accelerators (FPGAs, for example). I'm not disputing quantum speedup exists, of course. But it depends on the quantum and conventional systems in question, and the algorithms (algorithms can be optimized for convential computing as well in many cases). Quantum computing has a long way to go, and these declarations of quantum supremacy are often light on facts and employ a lot of handwaving.Reply 
hannibal More likely this tell that quantum Computer Are farter is spesific type of situations. The thing that was expected but now They did prove it.Reply
In most normal situations old fachisoned computers still have a lead.
Aka They have provided first time a proof that quantum computers can be faster than normal in some situation maybe in the far far away Galaxy... Sorry time.
Before this it was suposed that quantum computers can be faster. So supose vs proof is the Main course of this news. 
serendipiti I think that probably the biggest quantum computer is the human brain. And quantum computers don't need to compete against the classical computational model, it will necessary we use them as a complement to achieve bigger paralellism: break down the problem and combine all the solutions.Reply 
bit_user
It turns out that's all you need to do. According to Amdahl's Law, a Nwide parallel implementation of a classical computer can only ever be N times as fast as one of those computing elements. So, all you need to show is that a quantum computer can outscale classical computers.21416636 said:Most of these comparisons are against general purpose processors.
Anyway, did you check the paper the article is about? It's really not couched in specifics of particular modern computing systems, but rather trying to demonstrate a fundamental characteristic of quantum computers vs. classical ones.21416636 said:This article doesn't say ANYTHING about the hardware in question.
Hint: Lucian always cites his source right at the top (as do most authors on this site). On the linked arxiv.org page, you'll find a PDF link to the paper. 
bit_user
Upvoted, because you're right. But please read your posts at least once, before clicking the submit button. Thanks.21417016 said:More likely this tell that quantum Computer Are farter is spesific type of situations. 
bit_user
Whether a system employs quantum computing isn't a matter of opinion. Quantum computers have a precise definition:21417925 said:I think that probably the biggest quantum computer is the human brain.
Quantum computing is computing using quantummechanical phenomena, such as superposition and entanglement. A quantum computer is a device that performs quantum computing.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_computing
Lol wut?21417925 said:And quantum computers don't need to compete against the classical computational model, it will necessary we use them as a complement to achieve bigger paralellism: break down the problem and combine all the solutions.
The question isn't moot. Any type of big computer is expensive, so it's important to know what type of computer is needed before buying/building it. And in this case, the cost is particularly large, since it includes the cost of many inventions and innovations to make quantum computing at scale both possible and practical.