IONQForte+36.AQ.LiveIBM.QCondor+1121.QubitsQNTNMHelios+48.LogQubitsPSIQNTMPhotonic+$1B.SeriesERGTIAnkaa-3+99.5%.FidelQBTSAdv2+5000.QubitsQUERAAquila+256.QubitsSNDX.AQAQ+AI+$500M.SerEPASQLNeutral+EUR152M.SerBXNDUBorealis+SPAC.$302MINFLQColdAtom+SPAC.$540MFUND.YTD2025-26$6.2B.Raised
Home/Quantum Computer Specs Compared
COMPLETE DATABASE // PROCESSOR SPECIFICATIONS

Every Quantum Computer Compared

Complete specifications for every major quantum processor from IBM, Google, Quantinuum, IonQ, Rigetti, Atom Computing, Microsoft, and more. Sorted by qubit count and including fidelity metrics, coherence times, gate speeds, connectivity topology, operating temperature, cloud access, and current operational status. Data sourced from manufacturer publications, peer-reviewed papers, and verified company disclosures.

Published: March 2026 | Updated: March 2026 | 40 processors tracked
Processors Tracked
40
Manufacturers
21
Max Qubits
5,627
Approaches
8

All Quantum Processors (Sorted by Qubit Count)

ProcessorManufacturerApproachQubits1Q Fidelity2Q FidelityCoherenceGate SpeedCloudYearStatus
AdvantageD-Wave Systemssuperconducting5,627--~20 µs (annealing time ~20 µs)N/A (quantum annealer)Yes2020commercial
Advantage2D-Wave Systemssuperconducting4,400--~100 µsN/A (quantum annealer)Yes2024commercial
QuEra 3,000+ qubit systemQuEra Computingneutral-atom3,00099.9%99.9%~2 s~1 µs (Rydberg gate)No2026research
KookaburraIBMsuperconducting1,386----No2026research
1,180-atom ArrayAtom Computingneutral-atom1,18099.5%99.0%~40 s~1 µs (Rydberg gate)No2023prototype
CondorIBMsuperconducting1,12199.5%98.5%~90 µs~340 ns (CNOT)No2023research
FlamingoIBMsuperconducting46299.9%99.5%200 µs~60 nsNo2025prototype
OspreyIBMsuperconducting43399.5%99.0%~90 µs~340 ns (CNOT)No2022research
AquilaQuEra Computingneutral-atom25699.5%99.5%~2 s~1 µs (Rydberg gate)Yes2023commercial
BorealisXanaduphotonic216--N/A (photonic)~100 ps (optical gates)Yes2022commercial
FresnelPasqalneutral-atom20099.5%99.0%~1 s~1 µs (Rydberg gate)Yes2024commercial
Heron r2IBMsuperconducting15699.9%99.7%200 µs~60 ns (ECR gate)Yes2024commercial
Heron r1IBMsuperconducting13399.8%99.5%150 µs~70 ns (ECR gate)Yes2023commercial
EagleIBMsuperconducting12799.5%99.0%100 µs~340 ns (CNOT)Yes2021commercial
WillowGoogle Quantum AIsuperconducting10599.93%99.7%~100 µs~25 ns (single), ~32 ns (two-qubit)No2024research
SQaleInfleqtionneutral-atom10099.5%99.0%~1 s~1 µsNo2024prototype
planqc Atom Processorplanqcneutral-atom10099.5%99.0%~1 s~1 µsNo2024prototype
HeliosQuantinuumtrapped-ion9699.99%99.9%>10 s~150 µs (two-qubit)Yes2025commercial
Ankaa-2Rigetti Computingsuperconducting8499.5%99.0%~25 µs~80 ns (two-qubit iSWAP)Yes2024commercial
WukongOrigin Quantumsuperconducting7299.5%97.0%~30 µs~200 ns (two-qubit)Yes2024commercial
TempoIonQtrapped-ion6499.99%99.7%>1 s~150 µs (two-qubit)Yes2025commercial
H2-1Quantinuumtrapped-ion5699.99%99.8%>10 s~200 µs (two-qubit)Yes2023commercial
IQM 54-qubit ProcessorIQM Quantum Computerssuperconducting5499.9%99.5%~40 µs~60 ns (two-qubit)No2025prototype
SycamoreGoogle Quantum AIsuperconducting5399.85%99.4%~20 µs~25 ns (single), ~32 ns (two-qubit)No2019research
ForteIonQtrapped-ion3699.97%99.5%>1 s~200 µs (two-qubit)Yes2023commercial
Ankaa-3Rigetti Computingsuperconducting3699.7%99.5%~30 µs~60 ns (two-qubit)Yes2025commercial
ToshikoOxford Quantum Circuitssuperconducting3299.7%98.5%~30 µs~80 nsYes2024commercial
AriaIonQtrapped-ion2599.96%99.4%>1 s~250 µs (two-qubit)Yes2022commercial
PINEAlpine Quantum Technologiestrapped-ion2499.97%99.5%>1 s~200 µs (two-qubit)Yes2023commercial
H1-1Quantinuumtrapped-ion2099.99%99.8%>10 s~200 µs (two-qubit)Yes2021commercial
GarnetIQM Quantum Computerssuperconducting2099.8%99.0%~30 µs~80 ns (two-qubit)Yes2023commercial
QuiX Quantum 20-mode ProcessorQuiX Quantumphotonic20--N/A (photonic)~ps (photonic)No2023commercial
HarmonyIonQtrapped-ion1199.5%96.0%>1 s~300 µs (two-qubit)Yes2020commercial
Majorana 1Microsofttopological8--Theoretically very long (topological protection)-No2025research
LucyOxford Quantum Circuitssuperconducting899.5%97.0%~25 µs~100 nsYes2022commercial
OcelotAmazon Web Servicescat-qubit7----No2025research
Diamond Quantum AcceleratorQuantum Brilliancenv-center599.0%95.0%~1 ms (room temp)~10 nsNo2023prototype
TriangulumSpinQ Technologyspin397.0%95.0%~1 s~ms (NMR pulses)No2022commercial
Gemini MiniSpinQ Technologyspin297.0%95.0%~1 s~ms (NMR pulses)No2021commercial
AuroraXanaduphotonicN/A--N/A (photonic)~100 ps (optical gates)No2025research
Sources: Manufacturer publications, arXiv preprints, and verified press releases. Data as of March 2026. "-" indicates data not publicly available.
QUANTUMINTEL.TECH ASSESSMENT

Qubit count alone is misleading. Fidelity and error correction matter more.

The processor with the most qubits is not necessarily the most capable quantum computer. Quantinuum's 56-qubit H2 system can run deeper, more complex circuits than many processors with 10 times the qubit count due to its 99.9975% two-qubit gate fidelity. Google's 105-qubit Willow demonstrated below-threshold error correction that larger, noisier processors cannot match. When comparing quantum computers, prioritize fidelity, error correction capability, and demonstrated algorithmic performance over raw qubit count.

Frequently Asked Questions

← Processor DatabaseIBM vs Google →

RELATED INTELLIGENCE

IBM vs Google Quantum: Head-to-Head ComparisonSuperconducting vs Trapped Ion vs Photonic QubitsEvery Quantum Computing Company: Complete List