In the nearest future quantum computers will be suitable for practical use. The development of quantum algorithms can be carried out using classical computers and specialized software that allows simulating of a quantum circuit functioning. Simulation results can be used to analyze the algorithm and also contribute to co-design when developing quantum architectures. However, when planning and performing numerical experiments, it is necessary to understand the capabilities of simulators and the limitations on the parameters of the quantum circuit imposed by the characteristics of the available classical computational resources (computers). This paper presents the results of computational experiments on simulating the operation of quantum circuits on an ideal quantum computer using the QuEST and Intel-QS packages, as well as our own "naïve" implementation. Restrictions on the size of a simulated quantum system N are shown when using computing systems of various classes — a virtual machine, a computing server, a computing server with a graphics accelerator (GPU), a supercomputer (the maximum achieved size is N = 33). The performance and scalability characteristics of the considered implementations on shared and distributed memory are given (the observed scaling efficiency is 30 % and 70 %, respectively). For the QuEST package and our own implementation the performance is presented for systems with graphics accelerator (GPU).
In the nearest future quantum computers will be suitable for practical use. The development of quantum algorithms can be carried out using classical computers and specialized software that allows simulating of a quantum circuit functioning. Simulation results can be used to analyze the algorithm and also contribute to co-design when developing quantum architectures. However, when planning and performing numerical experiments, it is necessary to understand the capabilities of simulators and the limitations on the parameters of the quantum circuit imposed by the characteristics of the available classical computational resources (computers). This paper presents the results of computational experiments on simulating the operation of quantum circuits on an ideal quantum computer using the QuEST and Intel-QS packages, as well as our own "naïve" implementation. Restrictions on the size of a simulated quantum system N are shown when using computing systems of various classes — a virtual machine, a computing server, a computing server with a graphics accelerator (GPU), a supercomputer (the maximum achieved size is N = 33). The performance and scalability characteristics of the considered implementations on shared and distributed memory are given (the observed scaling efficiency is 30 % and 70 %, respectively). For the QuEST package and our own implementation the performance is presented for systems with graphics accelerator (GPU).
The rapid expansion of quantum computing research has created a growing need for effective and scalable tools to simulate quantum algorithms. In this study, we present a performance analysis of several quantum circuit simulators by using the Deutsch-Jozsa (DJ) and Quantum Fourier Transform (QFT). A gate-based QASM implementation serves as the baseline and is converted to code compatible with each simulator. Our evaluation covers multi-CPU simulators like Qiskit, Qsim-Cirq, and QuEST, as well as their GPU-accelerated variants along with CUDA-Q, for qubit sizes ranging from 21 to 35. By profiling these algorithms, we compare key performance indicators and reveal notable efficiency differences between platforms. In particular, the multi-node version of QuEST shows strong CPU utilization, high speedup, and efficient memory scalability. whereas GPUbased implementations provide clear performance advantages at higher qubit counts. These findings offer practical guidance for choosing simulation platforms according to problem size and available computing resources, thereby supporting more efficient quantum-algorithm workflows.
Quantum computing in the NISQ era requires advanced emulation tools to facilitate the development and validation of complex quantum algorithms, as current quantum devices remain too noisy and resource-limited. This work presents a comprehensive review of quantum emulation software available for HPC centers using various comparison metrics to evaluate parallelization, precision, acceleration via Graphics Processing Unit (GPU), emulation with noise, among others. The comparative analysis evaluates four quantum emulation frameworks (QuEST, Qaptiva HPC, CUDA-Q, and PennyLane) across three hardware platforms with distinct characteristics: two HPC clusters (Spartan-Eviden and Joliot-Curie TGCC) and one quantum emulation appliance (Eviden Qaptiva 804). The scope of this analysis is fundamentally tied to the state-vector emulation paradigm. The experimental results of our evaluation reveal that performance depends on classical hardware configuration and circuit characteristics, that is, CUDA-Q excels in single-GPU environments, while Qaptiva HPC shows advantages in distributed multi-node configurations (both CPU and GPU).
We introduce QuEST, the Quantum Exact Simulation Toolkit, and compare it to ProjectQ, qHipster and a recent distributed implementation of Quantum++. QuEST is the first open source, hybrid multithreaded and distributed, GPU accelerated simulator of universal quantum circuits. Embodied as a C library, it is designed so that a user's code can be deployed seamlessly to any platform from a laptop to a supercomputer. QuEST is capable of simulating generic quantum circuits of general one and two-qubit gates and multi-qubit controlled gates, on pure and mixed states, represented as state-vectors and density matrices, and under the presence of decoherence. Using the ARCUS and ARCHER supercomputers, we benchmark QuEST's simulation of random circuits of up to 38 qubits, distributed over up to 2048 compute nodes, each with up to 24 cores. We directly compare QuEST's performance to ProjectQ's on single machines, and discuss the differences in distribution strategies of QuEST, qHipster and Quantum++. QuEST shows excellent scaling, both strong and weak, on multicore and distributed architectures.
Abstract Classical simulation of quantum computers will continue to play an essential role in the progress of quantum information science, both for numerical studies of quantum algorithms and for modeling noise and errors. Here we introduce the latest release of Intel Quantum Simulator (IQS), formerly known as qHiPSTER. The high-performance computing (HPC) capability of the software allows users to leverage the available hardware resources provided by supercomputers, as well as available public cloud computing infrastructure. To take advantage of the latter platform, together with the distributed simulation of each separate quantum state, IQS allows to subdivide the computational resources to simulate a pool of related circuits in parallel. We highlight the technical implementation of the distributed algorithm and details about the new pool functionality. We also include some basic benchmarks (up to 42 qubits) and performance results obtained using HPC infrastructure. Finally, we use IQS to emulate a scenario in which many quantum devices are running in parallel to implement the quantum approximate optimization algorithm, using particle swarm optimization as the classical subroutine. The results demonstrate that the hyperparameters of this classical optimization algorithm depends on the total number of quantum circuit simulations one has the bandwidth to perform. Intel Quantum Simulator has been released open-source with permissive licensing and is designed to simulate a large number of qubits, to emulate multiple quantum devices running in parallel, and/or to study the effects of decoherence and other hardware errors on calculation results.
Quantum circuit simulation at scale demands high-performance computing (HPC) frameworks capable of distributing exponentially growing state vectors and tensor networks across heterogeneous compute clusters. As quantum algorithm development accelerates and circuits approach 50-100 qubits in practical workloads, simulation bottlenecks shift from single-node memory constraints to inter-node communication overhead, GPU memory bandwidth, and framework-level scheduling inefficiencies. This paper proposes the HPC Quantum Simulation Framework Benchmark (HQSFB), a systematic evaluation of five leading quantum simulation frameworks -- Qiskit Aer, Cirq on GCP, cuQuantum (NVIDIA), QuEST, and Intel Quantum Simulator (IQS) -- across six HPC deployment configurations spanning single-GPU workstations to 512-GPU supercomputer partitions. HQSFB introduces the Framework Efficiency Score (FES) combining simulation throughput, GPU utilisation, inter-node communication overhead, and memory scaling efficiency. Key results: cuQuantum achieves the highest FES (0.924) with 94.2% GPU utilisation and 42x speedup over CPU baseline at 512 GPUs; QuEST achieves the best memory scaling efficiency (0.962) for distributed statevector simulation; Qiskit Aer provides the broadest circuit compatibility with FES = 0.842. The framework provides HPC configuration guidance and an open benchmark suite for quantum simulation infrastructure planning.
The ongoing rise of interest in quantum computing (QC) is fueling considerable advances in quantum algorithms, as well as work on accelerating their simulation before sufficiently-capable QC prototypes are available. Since classical state-vector simulation time of QC systems scales exponentially with the number of qubits, QC simulator performance plays a significant role in algorithm and systems development. This paper provides a systems-level performance characterization of NVIDIA's CUDA Quantum (CUDA-Q) package, across several key metrics, on multiple GPU types. Our goal is to identify patterns or limitations in the implementation that may suggest future optimization opportunities. Our characterization also helps users on mid-scale GPU clusters plan likely runtime trajectories with problem size.11Professor Martonosi's research is supported in part by the US Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.