Superconducting vs Trapped Ion vs Photonic vs Neutral Atom
Qubit Modality Comparison
Comparison of 4 leading qubit technologies — coherence time, gate fidelity, scalability, operating conditions, and key players.
SuperconductingTrapped IonPhotonicNeutral Atom
Full Specification Comparison
| Specification | Superconducting | Trapped Ion | Photonic | Neutral Atom |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coherence Time | ~100 μs | ~10 min | ~150 μs | ~1.5 s |
| 2-qubit Fidelity | 99.5% | 99.9% | 99.5% | 99.5% |
| Operating Temp | 15 mK | Room temp | Room temp | ~10 μK |
| Max Qubits | 1,386 (IBM) | 36 (IonQ) | N/A | 1,225 (QuEra) |
| Gate Speed | ~20 ns | ~100 μs | ~10 ns | ~1 μs |
| Key Players | IBM, Google | IonQ, Quantinuum | PsiQuantum, Xanadu | QuEra, Atom Comp. |
| Scalability | Good | Moderate | Excellent | Excellent |
Expert Verdict
Superconducting leads in qubit count (IBM 1,386); trapped ions offer the best fidelity (99.9%); photonic enables room-temp operation; neutral atoms are the fastest scaling with 1,000+ qubits.
Subject Breakdown
Superconducting
0 Category Wins
Trapped Ion
2 Category Wins
- ★ Coherence Time: ~10 min
- ★ 2-qubit Fidelity: 99.9%
Photonic
1 Category Wins
- ★ Gate Speed: ~10 ns
Neutral Atom
2 Category Wins
- ★ Max Qubits: 1,225 (QuEra)
- ★ Scalability: Excellent