The December 2022 issue of IEEE Spectrum is here!

Close bar

Will Tomorrow's Supercomputers Be Superconducting?

IARPA looks to low-power superconducting logic for high-performance computing

2 min read
Will Tomorrow's Supercomputers Be Superconducting?
Illustration: Randi Klett; Images: Getty Images

Today, the list of the 500 fastest supercomputers is dominated by computers based on semiconducting circuitry. Ten years from now, will superconducting computers start to take some of those slots?

Last week, IARPA, the U.S. intelligence community’s high-risk research arm, announced that it had awarded its first set of research contracts in a multi-year effort to develop a superconducting computer. The program, called Cryogenic Computing Complexity (C3), is designed to develop the components needed to construct such a computer as well as a working prototype. 

Northrop Grumman is one of the awardees, along with IBM and Raytheon-BBN, in the first phase of IARPA's C3 project.

If the program succeeds, it could potentially be a big boon to the makers of supercomputers. The ubiquitous CMOS-based technology we use to make those systems is proving difficult to scale up without consuming staggering amounts of power.  

Superconducting circuitry, which boasts resistance-less wires and hyper-fast switches, could potentially be a faster and more efficient alternative – even when you take into account the fact that it will require cryocoolers to take the temperature down to a few degrees above absolute zero.

The idea of superconducting computing actually extends all the way back to the dawn of the computer age. One of the early candidates for digital logic was a superconducting switch called a cryotron, developed in the 1950’s by engineer Dudley Buck.

This time around, the leading logic candidate is likely to be a form of single-flux quantum (SFQ) circuitry. SFQ logic is based on flow: bits stream through the circuits as voltage pulses, which are blocked or passed by superconducting devices called Josephson junctions. A bit is 0 or 1 depending on whether a pulse is present or not during a given period of time.

I wrote about this form of logic a few years back, when a team at Northrop Grumman reported a new, lower-power incarnation of the technology. In fact, Northrop Grumman is one of the awardees, along with IBM and Raytheon-BBN, in the first phase of IARPA’s C3 project.

This first phase, according to program documents (pdf) released last year, will focus on demonstrating critical superconducting computing components. Two projects will focus on logic and two on memory, C3 program manager Marc Manheimer recently told HPCwire.  In phase two, the components will be combined to create a working computer. 

We’ll have more to come on this effort, so watch this space.

Follow Rachel Courtland on Twitter at @rcourt.

The Conversation (0)

Why Functional Programming Should Be the Future of Software Development

It’s hard to learn, but your code will produce fewer nasty surprises

11 min read
A plate of spaghetti made from code
Shira Inbar

You’d expectthe longest and most costly phase in the lifecycle of a software product to be the initial development of the system, when all those great features are first imagined and then created. In fact, the hardest part comes later, during the maintenance phase. That’s when programmers pay the price for the shortcuts they took during development.

So why did they take shortcuts? Maybe they didn’t realize that they were cutting any corners. Only when their code was deployed and exercised by a lot of users did its hidden flaws come to light. And maybe the developers were rushed. Time-to-market pressures would almost guarantee that their software will contain more bugs than it would otherwise.

Keep Reading ↓Show less