Systematic benchmarking of quantum computers: status and recommendations
Jeanette Miriam Lorenz, Thomas Monz, Jens Eisert, Daniel Reitzner, F. Schopfer, Frédéric Barbaresco, Krzysztof Kurowski, Ward van der Schoot, Thomas Strohm, Jean Sénellart, Cécile M. Perrault, M. Knufinke, Ziyad Amodjee, Mattia Giardini
Architectures for quantum computing can only be scaled up when they are accompanied by suitable benchmarking techniques. The document provides a comprehensive overview of the state and recommendations for systematic benchmarking of quantum computers. Benchmarking is crucial for assessing the performance of quantum computers, including the hardware, software, as well as algorithms and applications. The document highlights key aspects such as component-level, system-level, software-level, HPC-level, and application-level benchmarks. Component-level benchmarks focus on the performance of individual qubits and gates, while system-level benchmarks evaluate the entire quantum processor. Software-level benchmarks consider the compiler's efficiency and error mitigation techniques. HPC-level and cloud benchmarks address integration with classical systems and cloud platforms, respectively. Application-level benchmarks measure performance in real-world use cases. The document also discusses the importance of standardization to ensure reproducibility and comparability of benchmarks, and highlights ongoing efforts in the quantum computing community towards establishing these benchmarks. Recommendations for future steps emphasize the need for developing standardized evaluation routines and integrating benchmarks with broader quantum technology activities.
Architectures for quantum computing can only be scaled up when they are accompanied by suitable benchmarking techniques. The document provides a comprehensive overview of the state and recommendations for systematic benchmarking of quantum computers. Benchmarking is crucial for assessing the performance of quantum computers, including the hardware, software, as well as algorithms and applications. The document highlights key aspects such as component-level, system-level, software-level, HPC-level, and application-level benchmarks. Component-level benchmarks focus on the performance of individual qubits and gates, while system-level benchmarks evaluate the entire quantum processor. Software-level benchmarks consider the compiler's efficiency and error mitigation techniques. HPC-level and cloud benchmarks address integration with classical systems and cloud platforms, respectively. Application-level benchmarks measure performance in real-world use cases. The document also discusses the importance of standardization to ensure reproducibility and comparability of benchmarks, and highlights ongoing efforts in the quantum computing community towards establishing these benchmarks. Recommendations for future steps emphasize the need for developing standardized evaluation routines and integrating benchmarks with broader quantum technology activities.
Quantum computers have the potential to provide an advantage over classical computers in a number of areas. Numerous metrics to benchmark the performance of quantum computers, ranging from their individual hardware components to entire applications, have been proposed over the years. Objective comparisons are further hampered in practice as different variations of the same metric are used, and the data disclosed together with a reported metric value is often not sufficient to reproduce the measurements. In this poster, we present our recent article, where we address these challenges by providing a review of metrics and benchmarks for quantum computers [1], including 1) a comprehensive collection of benchmarks allowing holistic comparisons of quantum computers, 2) a consistent format of the definitions across all metrics including a transparent description of the methodology and of the main assumptions and limitations, and 3) a reproducible approach by linking the metrics to open-source software used to evaluate them . We identify five areas where international standardization working groups could be established, namely: i) the identification and agreement on the categories of metrics that comprehensively benchmark device performance; ii) the identification and agreement on a set of well-established metrics that together comprehensively benchmark performance; iii) the identification of metrics specific to hardware platforms, including non-gate-based quantum computers; iv) inter-laboratory comparison studies to develop best practice guides for measurement methodology; and v) agreement on what data and software should be reported together with a metric value to ensure trust, transparency and reproducibility. We provide potential routes to advancing these areas. We expect that this work will accelerate the progress of quantum computing hardware towards quantum advantage. [1] D. Lall et al., A Review and Collection of Metrics and Benchmarks for Quantum Computers: Definitions, Methodologies and Software, arXiv:2502.06717.
As quantum processors continue to scale in size and complexity, the need for well-defined, reproducible, and technology-agnostic performance metrics becomes increasingly critical. Here we present a suite of scalable quantum computing benchmarks developed as key performance indicators (KPIs) within the EU Quantum Flagship. These proposed benchmarks are designed to assess holistic system performance rather than isolated components, and to remain applicable across both noisy intermediate-scale quantum (NISQ) devices and future fault-tolerant architectures. We introduce four core benchmarks addressing complementary aspects of quantum computing capability: large multi-qubit circuit execution via a Clifford Volume benchmark, scalable multipartite entanglement generation through GHZ-state preparation, a benchmark based on the application of Shor's period-finding subroutine to simple functions, and a protocol quantifying the benefit of quantum error correction using Bell states. Each benchmark is accompanied by clearly specified protocols, reporting standards, and scalable evaluation methods. Together, these KPIs provide a coherent framework for transparent and fair performance assessment across quantum hardware platforms and for tracking progress late-NISQ toward early fault-tolerant quantum computation.
Rapid advances in quantum computing technology lead to an increasing need for software simulators that enable both algorithm design and the validation of results obtained from quantum hardware. This includes calculations that aim at probing regimes of quantum advantage, where a quantum computer outperforms a classical computer in the same task. High performance computing (HPC) platforms play a crucial role as today’s quantum devices already reach beyond the limits of what powerful workstations can model, but a systematic evaluation of the individual performance of the many offered simulation packages is lacking so far. In this Technical Review, we benchmark several software packages capable of simulating quantum dynamics with a special focus on HPC capabilities. We develop a containerized toolchain for benchmarking a large set of simulation packages on a local HPC cluster using different parallelisation capabilities, and compare the performance and system size-scaling for three paradigmatic quantum computing tasks. Our results can help finding the right package for a given simulation task and lay the foundation for a systematic community effort to benchmark and validate upcoming versions of existing and also newly developed simulation packages.
Abstract The technological development of increasingly larger quantum processors on different quantum platforms raises the problem of how to fairly compare their performance, known as quantum benchmarking of quantum processors. This is a challenge that computer scientists have already faced when comparing classical processors, leading to the development of various mathematical tools to address it, but also to the identification of the limits of this problem. In this work, we briefly review the most important aspects of both classical processor benchmarks and the metrics comprising them, providing precise definitions and analyzing the quality attributes that they should exhibit. Subsequently, we analyze the intrinsic properties that characterize the paradigm of quantum computing and hinder the naive transfer of strategies from classical benchmarking. However, we can still leverage some of the lessons learned such as the quality attributes of a good benchmark such as relevance, reproducibility, fairness, verifiability and usability. Additionally, we review some of the most important metrics and benchmarks for quantum processors proposed in the literature, assessing what quality attributes they fulfill. Finally, we propose general guidelines for quantum benchmarking. These guidelines aim to pave the way for establishing a roadmap towards standardizing the performance evaluation of quantum devices, ultimately leading to the creation of an organization akin to the Standard Performance Evaluation Corporation (SPEC).
As quantum computing (QC) continues to evolve in hardware and software, measuring progress in this complex and diverse field remains a challenge. To track progress, uncover bottlenecks, and evaluate community efforts, benchmarks play a crucial role. But which benchmarking approach best addresses the diverse perspectives of QC stakeholders? We conducted the most comprehensive systematic literature review of this area to date, combining NLP-based clustering with expert analysis to develop a novel taxonomy and definitions for QC benchmarking, aligned with the quantum stack and its stakeholders. In addition to organizing benchmarks in distinct hardware, software, and application focused categories, our taxonomy hierarchically classifies benchmarking protocols in clearly defined subcategories. We develop standard terminology and map the interdependencies of benchmark categories to create a holistic, unified picture of the quantum benchmarking landscape. Our analysis reveals recurring design patterns, exposes research gaps, and clarifies how benchmarking methods serve different stakeholders. By structuring the field and providing a common language, our work offers a foundation for coherent benchmark development, fairer evaluation, and stronger cross-disciplinary collaboration in QC.
As quantum computing systems continue to mature, there is an increasing need for benchmarking methodologies that capture performance in terms of meaningful, application-level metrics. In this work, we present a scalable framework for application-level quantum benchmarking that is designed to support internal system evaluation and cross-platform comparison across technology providers. Our framework is guided by a set of core principles, including measurability, simplicity, scalability, and extensibility. We present 13 benchmark families that reflect realistic workloads across multiple domains. This enables the systematic evaluation of the quality of solutions, the total execution time, total used energy, as well as Time-to-Solution. The benchmarks are designed to be reproducible, interpretable across stakeholder groups, and adaptable to evolving system capabilities. The framework aims to bridge the gap between low-level performance metrics and real-world value, providing a unified approach to assessing quantum systems. The resulting benchmarks support development and validation and contribute to the foundation of industry-wide benchmarking standards.