-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 159
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Benchmarking of Qsim with Cirq #127
Comments
Would the following help? This simple benchmark shows that qsimcirq is 5x faster. The benchmark is based on qsim/qsimcirq_tests/qsimcirq_test.py Line 44 in e4dadfe
|
We have a simple comparison of qsim vs. the Cirq simulator in the tutorial doc, but I imagine this issue is looking towards a more complete benchmark. |
Cross ref quantumlib/Cirq#1124 we could possibly implement this under the same suite of benchmarks. |
Hello, I compared qsim with the standard Cirq simulator on 2 AMD EPYC 7502 CPUs (64 cores) with 512 RAM as well as both with the best GPU Cirq simulator (QuLacs-GPU), I was able to find, on a v100 GPU among others (see plot 1). Still, in plot 1 one can see that qsim with fused gates and 64 threads starts outperforming any other considered Cirq simulation method for >21 qubits. At 29 qubits when the GPUs run out of RAM qsim at the 2 AMD EPYC 7502 CPUs is about a factor of 2 faster than QuLacs-GPU on a v100 GPU; or respectively they are comparable for qsim on one AMD EPYC 7502 CPU. |
Need to do a benchmark fo qsim with cirq, and publish documentation.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: