CRQC Readiness Benchmark (Q-Day Estimator)

Use the CRQC Readiness Benchmark (Q‑Day Estimator) to turn assumptions into a defensible, crypto‑specific forecast. The tool converts four inputs, LQC (logical qubits), LOB (logical operations budget), QOT (logical ops/sec), and an annual growth factor, into a Composite CRQC Readiness Score and a projected “Q‑Day” (when week‑scale factoring of RSA‑2048 becomes practical). Start with Conservative / Median / Aggressive presets, then tweak to match vendor claims or your own view of roadmaps and error‑correction progress. This is intentionally focused on cryptographic breakability, not generic “quantum advantage,” so it may diverge from headline qubit counts.

For readers who want the most detailed, capability‑driven approach to forecasting Q‑Day, see my full methodology article article Path to CRQC – A Capability‑Driven Method for Predicting Q‑Day. It maps the eight technical capabilities behind CRQC, their interdependencies, and TRLs. By design, the Q‑Day Estimator and its methodology presented here are simpler and immediately usable: they compress those capabilities into three executive levers – Logical Qubit Capacity (LQC), Logical Operations Budget (LOB), and Quantum Operations Throughput (QOT) – so non‑expert users can track tangible milestones and run scenario analyses without wading through the full stack.

Another useful signal I track is vendor execution: announcements and public roadmaps from quantum hardware manufacturers, weighted by their historical hit‑rate on milestones teams that consistently deliver earn more credibility on future targets, and their claims map more directly to LQC/LOB/QOT in the estimator. See the list here: Quantum Hardware Companies and Roadmaps Comparison (2025 Edition).

Disclaimer: this estimator is for education and scenario exploration only – it is not a prediction, guarantee, or formal risk assessment, and it should not be relied on for policy, compliance, investment, or procurement decisions. Methodology and assumptions used for this estimator: https://postquantum.com/post-quantum/crqc-readiness-benchmark/

CRQC Readiness Benchmark (Q-Day Estimator)

An interactive way to explore how close we may be to a cryptographically relevant quantum computer (CRQC) for breaking RSA-2048. Adjust assumptions below to see how the projected Q‑Day shifts. Methodology & discussion. Disclaimer: this tool is for experimentation and scenario analysis only.

Scenarios: Load a starting scenario, then tweak parameters to explore.

Switch to Advanced to control 10 interdependent capabilities. Basic lets you set LQC/LOB/QOT directly.

Logical Qubit Capacity (LQC)

Count of error-corrected (logical) qubits available.

Logical Operations Budget (LOB)

Exponent (10^x): x

Reliable logical operations available (circuit depth).

Quantum Operations Throughput (QOT)

Exponent (10^x): x

Logical operations per second (throughput).

Growth factor (× per year)

Annual capability multiplier for the composite score.

Advanced formula (optional)

LQC₀ (baseline)

LOB₀ (baseline)

QOT₀ (baseline)

Composite CRQC Readiness Score

0.00

Projected Q-Day

—

Projected CRQC Readiness score over time

Score 1.0 ≈ quantum capability to factor RSA-2048 in about one week. Adjust inputs and formula to explore scenarios. Estimates are illustrative only.

Advanced slider meaning: 0% ≈ no practical capability; 100% ≈ threshold maturity needed to help break RSA‑2048 in ~1 week under the current baseline targets (LQC₀, LOB₀, QOT₀). Intermediate values represent partial progress toward that threshold.

Quantum Error Correction efficiency: Code distance scaling, overhead, and reliability of logical qubits. Strongly drives LQC and LOB.

Syndrome extraction speed & reliability: Measurement cycle time, feedback. Major driver of QOT.

Below‑threshold physical error rates: Physical gate fidelities well below threshold. Strong on LQC/LOB, modest on QOT.

Qubit connectivity & routing: Parallel two‑qubit ops and low swap overhead; important for QOT, some for LOB.

Logical Clifford gate performance: Speed of logical Cliffords/lattice surgery; helps QOT/LOB.

Magic‑state factory throughput & fidelity: Sets non‑Clifford gate budget and rate; heavy on LOB and QOT; small LQC effect via overhead.

Decoder performance: Latency/accuracy to keep up with QEC; helps QOT and LOB.

Continuous operation: Stable multi‑day runtime without resets; heavy on LOB.

Algorithm integration & orchestration: Compilers/schedulers/stack; minor boosts across metrics.

Modular interconnectivity: Network/photonic links between modules; boosts LQC via scale‑out; slight QOT impact.

Logical Qubit Capacity (LQC): number of error-corrected, stable qubits available to run long algorithms. In vendor materials, look for keywords like “logical qubit”, “error-corrected qubit”, or “fault-tolerant qubit”. Roadmaps sometimes state targets such as “100+ logical qubits by 2029.”

Logical Operations Budget (LOB): reliable count of logical gate operations (circuit depth) your system can execute before failure. In announcements, look for “gate fidelity”, “circuit depth”, or “error-corrected layers.” Higher two-qubit fidelities and longer coherence indicate larger LOB.

Quantum Operations Throughput (QOT): how many logical operations per second your machine can execute (akin to clock speed). Vendors may refer to “ops per second”, “cycle time”, or metrics like CLOPS.

Score = (LQC / LQC₀) × (LOB / LOB₀) × (QOT / QOT₀). By default LQC₀=1,000; LOB₀=10¹²; QOT₀=10⁶. Score 1.0 ≈ capability to factor RSA-2048 in ~1 week. You can tweak these baseline constants here.

Growth factor: assumed year-over-year multiplier of the composite capability score. Example: 2.0 means doubling per year; 3.0 means tripling. Look for roadmap wording like “doubling yearly”, “10× every five years”, or similar. This drives the projected Q‑Day when score reaches 1.0.