Skip to content

Science1 publisher3 min readPublished

Quantinuum's 98-qubit Helios lands on schedule, and the question moves to shuttling

The trapped-ion roadmap has now delivered 32, 56 and 98 qubits in consecutive generations. What matters next is whether ion transport through junctions keeps scaling.

The Scientist · Science desk

Drafted by a language model from the sources cited here and checked against its claim ledger before publication. How we use AISend a correction

Photograph accompanying Quantinuum's 98-qubit Helios lands on schedule, and the question moves to shuttling
Photo: nature.com

What happened

  • Helios is a trapped-ion quantum computer, meaning it uses charged atoms suspended in free space by electromagnetic fields.
  • Helios operates using 98 qubits, which makes it the largest trapped-ion quantum computer built so far.
  • Quantinuum, the company behind Helios, is based in Cambridge, UK and Broomfield, Colorado.
  • Quantinuum demonstrated earlier machines operating on 32 qubits in 2023 and 56 qubits in 2025.
  • The generation-over-generation qubit growth is 1.75x twice in a row (56/32 = 1.75; 98/56 = 1.75), and 3.06x from 32 to 98.

Compiled by The ScientistSomething wrong?How this is made

Why it matters

Quantinuum has built Helios, a 98-qubit trapped-ion machine that the phys.org account describes as the largest of its type constructed so far [1][2]. The headline number is less interesting than the cadence behind it: the same company demonstrated 32 qubits in 2023 and 56 in 2025, which works out to 1.75 times per generation, twice consecutively, and 3.06 times over the span [4][5].

Compounding on a published schedule is the rarest thing in this sector, and it is worth understanding what is actually compounding. Helios and its predecessors use a QCCD, or quantum charge-coupled device, an architecture invented in 2002 that splits storage from processing much as a classical machine splits drives from a CPU [6]. Ions are physically transported by electric fields from the storage region to the processing region, where laser pulses execute the gates [8]. Helios is laid out like a rosette: a storage ring, two processing streamers, and a four-way X junction where they meet [7]. This is the opposite of the superconducting approach, where qubits sit still and control signals move in time [9].

The architecture buys three things, according to the same account: gates that do not disturb neighbouring qubits, which suppresses crosstalk; mid-circuit measurement and reset, so errors can be caught early; and connectivity between distant qubits, since ions can be fetched from and returned to different parts of memory within limits [10][11][12]. Helios is reported to demonstrate all three [13].

Two changes made that possible. The X junction lets the machine move several things at once, where earlier QCCD systems could only shuttle data along a single line or loop [14]. Exploiting that second dimension required new classical control software, called Helios runtime, which plans the routing [15]. That is the load-bearing detail for anyone evaluating vendors. Qubit count in a QCCD is downstream of how many ions you can keep in motion, through how many junctions, under a scheduler that does not stall. A roadmap that has hit 1.75 times twice is a claim about transport engineering and compilation, not about trap fabrication alone.

The performance claim needs the caveat attached. The write-up says Helios can run computations that no existing supercomputer can reproduce by known methods within reasonable time and power [16], and then notes that the computations to date have been random benchmark tests, so the practical significance remains limited [17]. Both statements come from the same source, and the second is the one an operator should price in.

Distance to usefulness: the article puts even optimistic estimates for commercially and scientifically meaningful quantum computation at the order of a million qubits [18]. Going from 98 to a million is a factor of about 10,200; at 1.75 times per generation that is roughly 17 more generations, and at one generation every two years, on the pace from 2023 to 2025, about 34 years [20]. The UK National Quantum Strategy's Mission 1 targets a fault-tolerant machine capable of a trillion operations [19].

What to watch: whether the next machine adds junctions rather than simply more ions per existing junction; whether the runtime's scheduling overhead grows faster than qubit count; and whether the demonstrations move off random circuits. If the fourth generation lands at roughly 170 qubits with a second junction, the compounding argument holds. If it lands with the same rosette and more ions, transport is the ceiling.

Loading claim ledger
Loading source directory links
Loading share composer
Loading topic controls
Loading related stories