NEC has quietly quit quantum computing hardware development, report claims — company says it will continue to evaluate practical applications and industrializat

NEC has quietly quit quantum computing hardware development, report claims — company says it will continue to evaluate practical applications and industrializat

The demise of NEC's semiconductor business was not sudden. NEC dismantled its semiconductor business in stages over roughly a decade. NEC effectively gave up doing DRAM alone in 1999, when it spun off its DRAM operations into NEC-Hitachi Memory, which was named Elpida. In November 2002, NEC spun its remaining semiconductor operation — MCUs, system LSIs/SoCs and other devices — into a separate company called NEC Electronics and later renamed Renesas Electronics.

Now, NEC is reportedly stepping away from quantum computer hardware as its commercialization remains distant, but development costs continue to mount. Furthermore, given NEC's current business focus — IT services, enterprise systems, aerospace and defense, telecom infrastructure, and AI and security — quantum computers are not exactly a natural fit.

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News , or add us as a preferred source , to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Anton Shilov Social Links Navigation Contributing Writer Anton Shilov is a contributing writer at Tom’s Hardware. Over the past couple of decades, he has covered everything from CPUs and GPUs to supercomputers and from modern process technologies and latest fab tools to high-tech industry trends.

ttquantia There are too few mainstream application for QC. Media reporting gives people the idea that quantum computers are somehow "faster" than conventional computers, but this is not the case, and conventional computers would not be replaced even if there were practical quantum computers. QC does not do most applications at all, no raytracing, no scientific computing or conventional supercomputing, and is actually limited to very few specialized applications. Nothing that would justify spending billions and billlions of dollars. Reply

zurboz ttquantia said: There are too few mainstream application for QC. Media reporting gives people the idea that quantum computers are somehow "faster" than conventional computers, but this is not the case, and conventional computers would not be replaced even if there were practical quantum computers. QC does not do most applications at all, no raytracing, no scientific computing or conventional supercomputing, and is actually limited to very few specialized applications. Nothing that would justify spending billions and billlions of dollars. Wrong, Scientific computing is actually one of quantum computing’s major proposed uses—especially quantum chemistry, materials simulation and some physics problems. It just doesn't replace general-purpose HPC.. also those specialized applications include chemistry/materials, cryptanalysis, certain optimization problems, quantum simulation, and potentially parts of machine learning. You don't need quantum to replace GPUs for the market to become valuable at all.. The real bearish case is that useful quantum advantage may remain too narrow, too expensive, or too far away for today's quantum-company valuations to make sense. NVIDIA GPUs don't replace CPUs either. A specialized accelerator can still support a gigantic business if the workload it accelerates becomes important enough. Reply

Key considerations

  • Investor positioning can change fast
  • Volatility remains possible near catalysts
  • Macro rates and liquidity can dominate flows

Reference reading

More on this site

Informational only. No financial advice. Do your own research.

Leave a Comment