Potentially unpopular take: memory manufacturers have been operating on the margins of profitability for quite a while now. Their products are essentially an indistinguishable commodity. Memory from Samsung or Micron or another manufacturer may have slight differences in overclockability, but that matters little to folks who just want a stable system. Hopefully the shortage leads large purchasers to engage in long-term contracts with the memory manufacturers which give them the confidence to invest in new fabs and increased capacity. That would be great for everyone. Additionally, we're likely to see Chinese fab'd DRAM now, which they've been attempting since the '70s but never been competitive at. With these margins, any new manufacturer could gain a foothold.
If LLMs' utility continues to scale with size (which seems likely as we begin training embodied AI on a massive influx of robotic sensor data) then it will continue to gobble up memory for the near future. We may need both increased production capacity _and_ a period of more efficient software development techniques as was the case when a new 512kb upgrade cost $1,000.
> Hopefully the shortage leads large purchasers to engage in long-term contracts with the memory manufacturers which give them the confidence to invest in new fabs and increased capacity.
Most DRAM is already purchased through contracts with manufacturers.
Manufacturers don't actually want too many extremely long term contracts because it would limit their ability to respond to market price changes.
Like most commodities, the price you see on places like Newegg follows the "spot price", meaning the price to purchase DRAM for shipment immediately. The big players don't buy their RAM through these channels, they arrange contracts with manufacturers.
The contracts with manufacturers will see higher prices in the future, but they're playing the long game and will try to delay or smooth out purchasing to minimize exposure to this spike.
> Additionally, we're likely to see Chinese fab'd DRAM now, which they've been attempting since the '70s but never been competitive at.
Companies like Samsung and SK Hynix have DRAM fabs in China already. This has been true for decades. You may have Chinese fab'd DRAM in the computer you're using right now.
Are you referring to complete home-grown DRAM designs? That, too, was already in the works.
> Manufacturers don't actually want too many extremely long term contracts because it would limit their ability to respond to market price changes.
I don't agree with this sentence. Why would not the same apply advice to oil and gas contracts? If you look at the size and duration of oil and gas contracts for major energy importers, they often run 10 years or more. Some of the contracts in Japan and Korea are so large, that a heavy industrial / chemical customers will take an equity stake in the extraction site.
Except silicon, power, and water (and a tiny amount of plastic/paper for packaging), what else does a fab need that only produces DRAM? If true, then power is far and away the most variable input cost.
As I mentioned, various groups within China have been working on China-native DRAM since the '70s. What's new are the margins and market demand to allow them to be profitable with DRAM which is still several years behind the competition.
Well, what really prompted this crisis is AI, as well as Samsung shutting down some production (and I have to say I don't think they mind that the pricing has skyrocketed as a result!)
If the shortage of RAM is because of AI (so servers/data centers I presume?), wouldn't that mean the shortage should be localized to RDIMM rather than the much more common UDIMM that most gaming PCs use? But it seems to me like the pricing is going up more for UDIMM than RDIMM.
It's a sad trend for "the rest of us" and history in general. The economic boom of the 80's thru the 2010s has been a vast democratization of computation - hardware became more powerful and affordable, and algorithms (at least broadly if not individually) became more efficient. We all had supercomputers in our pockets. This AI movement seems to move things in the opposite direction, in that us plebeians have less and less access to RAM, computing power and food and...uh...GPUs to play Cyberpunk; and are dependent on Altermanic aristocracy to dribble compute onto us at their leisure and for a hefty tithe.
I am hoping some of that Clayton Christensen disruption the tech theocracy keep preaching about comes along with some O(N) decrease in transformer/cDNN complexity that disrupts the massive server farms required for this AI boom/bubble thing.
> This AI movement seems to move things in the opposite direction, in that us plebeians have less and less access to RAM, computing power and food and...uh...GPUs to play Cyberpunk; and are dependent on Altermanic aristocracy to dribble compute onto us at their leisure and for a hefty tithe.
Compute is cheaper than ever. The ceiling is just higher for what you can buy.
Yes, we have $2000 GPUs now. You don't have to buy it. You probably shouldn't buy it. Most people would be more than fine with the $200-400 models, honestly. Yet the fact that you could buy a $2000 GPU makes some people irrationally angry.
This is like the guy I know who complains that pickup trucks are unfairly priced because a Ford F-150 has an MSRP of $80,000. It doesn't matter how many times you point out that the $80K price tag only applies to the luxury flagship model, he anchors his idea of how much a pickup truck costs to the highest number he can see.
Computing is cheaper than ever. The power level is increasing rapidly, too. The massive AI investments and datacenter advancements are pulling hardware development forward at an incredible rate and we're winning across the board as consumers. You don't have to buy that top of the line GPU nor do you have to max out the RAM on your computer.
Some times I think people with this mentality would be happier if the top of the line GPU models were never released. If nVidia stopped at their mid-range cards and didn't offer anything more, the complaints would go away even though we're not actually better off with fewer options.
One can see it that way, granted. When I zoom all the way out, all of consumer computation has existed as sort of an addendum or ancillary organ to the big customers: government, large corporations, etc. All our beloved consumer tech started out as absurdly high priced niche stuff for them. We've been sold the overflow capacity and binned parts. And that seems to be a more-or-less natural consequence of large purchasers signing large checks and entering predictable contracts. Individual consumers are very price sensitive and fickle by comparison. From that perspective, anything that increases overall capacity should also increase the supply of binned parts and overflow. Which will eventually benefit consumers. Though the intervening market adjustment period may be painful (as we are seeing). Consumers have also benefited greatly from the shrinking of component sizes, as this has had the effect of increasing production capacity with fixed wafer volume.
You still do. There is no "AI movement" you need to participate in. You can grab a copy of SICP and a banged up ten year old thinkpad and compute away, your brain will thank you. It's like when people complain that culture is unaffordable because the newest Marvel movie tickets cost 50 bucks, go to the library or standardebooks.org, the entire Western canon is free
Well put. Since the 1980's consumer has been driving the segment. Even supercomputers were built out of higher end consumer hardware (or playstations in one example).
The move to cloud computing and now AI mean that we're back in the mainframe days.
True, it is reminiscent of a time before me when people were lucky to have mainframe access through university. To be fair this was a long time in the making with the also quite aggressive move to cloud computing. While I don't mind having access to free AI tools, they seem to start taking possession of the content as well
It's not like you need 64GB to have "democratized computation". We used to have 64MB and that was plenty. Unfortunately, software got slower more quickly than hardware got quicker.
I don't disagree per-se, but this is the sort of thing which happens when only a few businesses exist in a commodity market with high entry costs. IOW, it's not great, but it is predictable. See: Oil.
There is a zero lower bound on the interest rate. Excess capital means negative returns on capital. The money system can't express the state of the real world so either companies close down until the yield is positive, or the companies pass on the artificial minimum price onto the consumer. In both cases, the real world is forced to match the state of the money system.
Being shocked that companies try their best to deal with the bad cards they have been dealt with should be expected. The money system simply cannot express the concept of surplus capital or abundance. Positive interest means capital is scarce, so capital must be made scarce even if there is abundance.
Before you come up with the argument that the interest rate is supposed to reflect a market property and therefore does not force itself upon the market, remember that I said that there is an artificial restriction in the money system that prevents the state of the real market to be expressed. The non-profit economy has never had a chance to exist, because our tools are too crude.
The non-profit economy includes resilient production with slight/minor overproduction.
Think about how stupid the idea of a guaranteed 0% yield bond is (aka cash). The government obligates itself to accept an infinite amount of debt if the real return on capital would ever fall negative. No wonder it has an incentive to inflate the value of the bond away.
I wonder how long it will take for China to flood the market with state-of-the-art modules. It's a pretty decent opportunity for them. They probably can hasten the build of new fabs more than many other nations.
But my guess is that this shortage is short-lived (mostly because of the threat above). There's no OPEC for tech.
Letting things go this unmanaged with a 3 year run way for AI demand seems a little hard to understand. In this case, not anticipating demand seems to creates more profit.
So, like, we were already pretty much priced out of higher-end graphic cards, and now it's happening to RAM. All this while jobs are disappearing, layoffs are ongoing and CEOs are touting AI's 'capabilities' left and right.
Next is probably CPUs, even if AIs don't use them that much, manufactures will shift production to something more profitable, then gouge prices so that only enterprises will pay for them.
What's next? Electricity?
Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world? /rant
Maybe that is the answer to how things are supposed to work if AI replaces everyone and no one can afford to buy their stuff.
Things being too cheap allows money to pool at the bottom in little people's hands in the forms of things like "their homes" and "their computers" and "their cars".
You don't really want billions in computing hardware (say) being stashed down there in inefficient, illiquid physical form, you want it in a datacentre where it can be leveraged, traded, used as security, etc. If it has to be physically held down there, ideally it should be expensive, leased and have a short lifespan. The higher echelons seem apparently to think they can drive economic activity by cycling money at a higher level amongst themselves rather than looping in actual people.
This exact price jump seems largely like a shock rather then a slow squeeze, but I think seeing some kind of reversal of the unique 20th century "life gets better/cheaper/easier every generation".
I very much disagree that consumers holding more hardware capabilities than they need is a bad thing. Replace computing hardware with mechanical tools, because they are basically tools, and consider if consumers be better off if wrenches and saw blades and machine tools were held more exclusively by business and large corporations. Would corporations use them more often? Probably. And yet it seems pretty clear that it would hurt the capabilities of regular people to not be able to fix things themselves or innovate outside of a corporate owned lab.
To me the #1 most important factor in a maintaining a prosperous and modern society is common access to tools by the masses, and computing hardware is just the latest set of tools.
Yeah, I'm always confused why programmers seem to like this technology given the vast negative consequences it will likely have for us. The upsides on the other hand seem to be the most insignificant things.
Ding ding ding. What a surprise that a system designed not for human flourishing but pure profit would actually deliver massive profit with no regard for human flourishing.
Humanity will have to adopt new human-focused modes of living and organizing society, or else. And climate change is coming along to make sure the owning class can't ignore this fact any longer.
With a hundred bucks and a Robinhood account, you too can be part of this greedy, evil and mysterious "owners of AI" class and (maybe) some day enjoy the promised spoils.
Oh the wonders of Capitalism, the economic system offering unequal abundance to everyone caring to take part... Where are the other, much touted systems, masters at spreading misery equally?
How much is due to long overdue infrastructure upgrades and greed by providers, vs the cost of energy?
Also, consumer prices _have_ risen (mine included), but it's not clear that this is only because AI. While EV charging is not at the scale of all data centers combined, it seems to grow even faster than the datacenter's consumption, and is expected to eclipse the latter around 2030. Maybe sooner due to missing solar incentives.
Also, to rant on:
According to [1], an average Gemini query costs about 0.01 cents (Figure 2 - say 6000 queries per kWh at 60 cents/kWh, which is probably more than the industrial consumers pay). The same paper says one other providers is not off by that much. I dare say that at least for me, I definitely save a lot of time and effort with these queries than I'd traditionally have to (go to library, manually find sources on the web, etc), so arguably, responsibly used, AI is really quite environmentally friendly.
Finally: Large data centers and their load is actually a bit fungible, so they can be used to stabilize the grid, as described in [2].
I would think it would be best if there were more transparency on where the costs come from and how they can be externalized fairly. To give one instance, Tesla could easily [3] change their software to monitor global grid status and adjust charging rates. Did it happen ? Not that I know. That could have a huge effect on grid stability. With PowerShare, I understand that vehicles can also send energy back to power the house - hence, also offload the grid.
That and water. Electricity: Google made a post about scaling k8s to 135.000 nodes yesterday, mentioning how each node has multiple GPUs taking up 2700 watts max.
Water, well this is a personal beef, but Microsoft built a datacenter which used potable / drinking water for backup cooling, using up millions of liters during a warm summer. They treat the water and dump it in the river again. This was in 2021, I can imagine it's only gotten worse again: https://www.aquatechtrade.com/news/industrial-water/microsof...
Is any datacenter's water use significant compared to other industrial installations? According to that article, all datacenters in North Holland use 550 Ml/yr. North Holland has 2.95M residents [0], who use 129 l/person-day [1], 47 Kl/person-year, 139,000 Ml/year for the whole region. So the data centers use an estimated 0.4% of the region's water. Data centers use about 3% of the Netherlands' electricity.
Why do you think this is a lot of water? What are the alternatives to pulling from the local water utility and are those alternatives preferable?
> abundance. For those that own stuff and no longer have to pay for other people to work for them.
Why are you saying that? Anybody working for a living (but saving money) can invest in AI stocks or ETFs and partake in that potential abundance. Robinhood accounts are free for all.
Yes electricity by more short-sighted, dirty methods (remember when crypto clowns bought an old fossil plant just for coin mining?) but more alarming, fresh water.
Drive prices have already exploded. New hard drives have doubled in price since the beginning of the year. I haven't checked SSD prices, but why would they not be crazy, too?
The AI bubble has also pushed up secondhand prices. I work in ewaste recycling. Two weeks ago, a petabyte's worth of hard drives showed up. After erasing, testing, listing, and selling them, I'll have a very merry Christmas.
After the supply constraints of the post-covid period, are graphics cards really that more expensive?
How long do you estimate this period of supply constraint will be? Will manufacturers continue to be greedy, or will they grow less greedy as the supply improves based on the price signals the high price indicates?
> Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world? /rant
It may have been a bit self-deprecating, but I think your “rant” is a more than justified question that really should be expanded well beyond just this matter. It’s related to a clear fraud that has been perpetrated upon the people of the western world in particular for many decades and generations now in many different ways. We have been told for decades and generations that “we have to plunder your money and debase of and give it to the rich that caused the {insert disaster caused by the ruling class} misery and we have to do it without any kind of consequences for the perpetrators and no, you don’t get any kind of ownership or investment and we have to do it now or the world will end”
In world history, the vast majority of abundance is downstream of conquest, not innovation. Plunder makes profit. Even in weird moments like today, where innovation is (or, at least, was) genuinely the driving force of abundance, that innovation would not have come about without the seed capital of Europe plundering Africa and the Americas.
Abundance isn't even the right framing. What most people actually want and need is a certain amount of resources - after which their needs are satiated and they move onto other endeavors. It's the elites that want abundance - i.e. infinite growth forever. The history of early agriculture is marked by hunter-gatherers outgrowing their natural limits, transitioning to farming, and then people figuring out that it's really fucking easy to just steal what others grow. Abundance came from making farmers overproduce to feed an unproductive elite. Subsistence farming gave way to farming practices that overtaxed the soil or risked crop failure.
The history of technology had, up until recently, bucked this trend. Computers got better and cheaper every 18 months because we had the time and money to exploit electricity and lithography to produce smaller computers that used less energy. This is abundance from innovation. The problem is, most people don't want abundance; the most gluttonous need for computational power can be satisfied with a $5000 gaming rig. So the tech industry has been dealing with declining demand, first with personal computers and then with smartphones.
AI fixes this problem, by being an endless demand for more and more compute with the economic returns to show for it. When AI people were talking about abundance, they were primarily telling their shareholders: We will build a machine that will make us kings of the new economy, and your equity shares will grant you seats in the new nobility. In this new economy, labor doesn't matter. We can automate away the entire working and middle classes, up to and including letting the new nobles hunt them down from helicopters for sport.
Ok, that's hyperbole. But assuming the AI bubble doesn't pop, I will agree that affordable CPUs are next on the chopping block. If that happens, modular / open computing is dead. The least restrictive computing environment normal people can afford will be a Macbook, solely because Apple has so much market power from iPhones that they can afford to keep the Mac around for vanity. We will get the dystopia RMS warned about, not from despotic control over computing, but from the fact that nobody will be able to afford to own their own computer anymore. Because abundance is very, very expensive.
Actually, this seems to be mostly a spike in retail prices, not wholesale DRAM contracts that are only up 60% or so in the past few months according to Samsung. So we should most likely place at least some fraction of the blame on our fellow consumers for overreacting to the news and hoarding RAM at overinflated prices. DRAM sticks are the new toilet paper.
> Actually, this seems to be mostly a spike in retail prices, not wholesale DRAM contracts that are only up 60% or so in the past few months according to Samsung. So we should most likely place at least some fraction of the blame on our fellow consumers for overreacting to the news and hoarding RAM at overinflated prices. DRAM sticks are the new toilet paper.
What is your source on that? Moore's Law is Dead directly contradicts your claims by saying that OpenAI has purchased unfinished wafers to squeeze the market.
I used to sell 64kbit (yes, bit) DRAM at $7 in 1982. 1 year later was <$0.50.
The memory business is a pure commodity and brutally cyclic. Big profit => build a fab => wait 2 years => oh shit, everyone else did it => dump units at below cost. Repeat.
Then you have “acts of God” like that time when a flood or fire or something caused the only factory in the world that produced some obscure part of memory chips to stop production and memory costs double almost overnight. I remember my 4 -> 32 MB back in the 90s cost a fortune because of this.
Same! And then they made new eDRAM for a hot minute as part of Crystal Well. It'd be fun to see them get back into the game in a serious way, but their on-again-off-again attitude toward dGPUs does not give me confidence in their ability to execute on such long-term plans.
Hardware is faster, but the "abstraction tax" is higher than ever.
As someone currently fighting to shave megabytes off a C++ engine, it hurts my soul to see a simple chat app (Electron) consume 800MB just to idle. We spent the last decade using Moore's Law to subsidize lazy garbage collection, five layers of virtualization, and shipping entire web browsers as application runtimes. The computer is fast, but the software is drowning it.
Built my son's first gaming PC 2 months ago. Figured it would be cheaper around Black Friday, but the prices were reasonable enough that we didn't wait. Turned out to be a huge savings to buy that fast DDR5 in September.
Just went through this today for my daughter- struggled to find an i5 not on pre-order, and the RAM was crippling- ended up going Ryzen 7 for a first time and 2x8Gb DDR5 6000 @ £119 - looking forward to building it with her!
This is really crazy. I built my first computer not too long ago; like I'm talking less than a month maybe, definitely less than 2. I paid $320 for 64GB Kit (CMK64GX5M2B5600C40) at Microcenter. It is now sold out in Chicago store and listed at $530.
I wanted to build a gaming PC around summer, to be able play with my son, but I postponed it for no real reason. I built this PC a 2 weeks ago, so instead of paying 250 pln (~$70 usd) for 32 GB RAM, I paid 899 pln (~$250). Now, exactly the same RAM costs 1099 pln (~$300).
I just got one of the last beelink ser-8s with 64gb for $750. They sold out by the time my order arrived. The newer ones are starting around 830 for a 32gb machine (admittedly with newer everything)
Maybe if they expect to upgrade within a few years it would be fine. But when I built my current computer 11 years ago I also didn't expect to need 16 gb of ram and only bought 8. 5 years later 16 gb of memory was a requirement for both software and games I was playing. And now 11 years later 16 gigs is not enough for fairly "simple" 3d modelling and 32 gigs is pretty close to the minimum requirement to fully utilize other modern hardware.
I bought 2x16gb for my home computer at $90 about three months ago. When I checked the price of the exact thing I bought just in the past day, it's now $270. The price increase is across the board whether it's a low end or high end build.
I think it's intended as a comparison of cost when building a gaming-capable computer vs. a console of somewhat equivalent power.
It used to be a general rule of thumb that you could build a computer of roughly equivalent power for the cost of a game console, or a little more — now the memory costs more than the whole console.
It still is a rule of thumb, you dont need DDR5 for a gaming computer let alone 64gb. A low end am4 cpu + 16gb of DD4 3600 and a decent gpu will beat a ps5 in performance and cost. I dont understand why the headline made this strange comparison.
It doesn't help that GPUs have also generally gone up over the past decade because there's more market for them besides gaming, along with how they benefit from being hugely parallel and the larger you can make them the better, and fabrication costs are shooting up. I think there was a GamersNexus video at the launch of one of the previous GPU generations that noted that there was a move from "more for your money" each generation towards "more for more", i.e. keeping the value roughly static and increasing the amount they charged for a more capable product.
That's a an analogy-- a literary technique the writer is using, to show the correspondence between the price of a specific amount of DDR5 RAM to a fully integrated system, so the reader can follow the conclusions of their article easier.
Lots of people are speculating that the price spike is AI related. But it might be more mundane:
I'd bet that a good chunk of the apparently sudden demand spike could be last month's Microsoft Windows 10 end-of-support finally happening, pushing companies and individuals to replace many years worth of older laptops and desktops all at once.
I worked in enterprise laptop repair two decades ago — I like your theory (and there's definitely meat there) but my experience was that if a system's OEM configuration wasn't enough to run modern software, we'd replace the entire system (to avoid bottlenecks elsewhere in the architecture).
I have no idea about the number of people this has actually affected, but this is exactly my situation. Need a new workstation with a bunch of RAM to replace my Win10 machine, so I don't really have viable options than paying the going rate.
It will be interesting to see the knock on effect of some upcoming consumer electronics; for example Apple was rumored to be working on a cheaper MacBook that uses an iPad CPU, and Valve is working on a SteamOS based gaming machine. Both will likely live/die based on price.
It's way too early to assume these prices are permanent. It's a supply crunch meeting a demand spike. The market will find equilibrium.
Big manufacturers also order their DRAM in advance with contractually negotiated pricing. They're not paying these spot market prices for every computer they ship.
edit: looks like i had the wrong understanding, thanks to the comments below for explaining
~~~~~helps that Apple's SoC has the RAM on the main die itself. They're probably immune from these price hikes, but a lot of the PC/Windows vendors would, which would only make Apple's position even stronger~~~~
They're probably immune for a while because they're probably using a long term contract, but when it comes time to renew they'll have to offer close to market price to convince the manufacturers not to use that fab space for more profitable memory.
How does that make a difference? It's not like the price change is on DIMMs. The price change is on the DRAM, which is a commodity item. It's not like someone is going to discount it if you tell them "nah, I'm going to solder this one to my SoC".
If Apple is insulated it is likely because Apple signs big contracts for large supply and manufacturers would prefer to be insulated from short-term demand shocks and have some reliability that their fabs can keep running and producing profitable chips.
I also had that misunderstanding, so after seeing this comment I looking up info. In this article you can see the xray of the m1 chip composited onto the photo of the chip, which has external memory components. You can also see in the architecture diagram that the memory is attached from outside the area where the Fabric, CPU, GPU, NPU, cache, and some other unlabeled things are located. https://www.macrumors.com/guide/m1/
I just checked how much I paid around 12 months ago for Crucial 96GB kit (2x48GB ddr5 5600 so-dimm). Was $224, same kit today I see listed at $592, wild :/
Same, bought in August for $250 (EU), now it's ~$840. I ended up returning the laptop I'd bought it for and thought 'why hold on to the RAM, it'll only depreciate in value,' so I returned that too. Better hold on to my PS5, I guess.
I did buy 384 GB worth of Samsung DDR5-4800 sticks for my homelab a few months ago. I was wondering at the time if I really needed it, well ended up using it anyway, and turns out, dodged a bullet big time.
Just bought that exact kit for my Minisforum 790S7 build at the eye watering $592... Kicking myself as I was just starting to contemplate it early Oct but not yet seriously looking
RAM has been cheap long enough and now no one remembers how to write efficient GUI apps.
I'm joking, but only kind of. It's not a domain that I do a lot of, but I haven't touched Qt in so long that it would basically be starting from scratch if I tried to write an app with it; I could write an Election app in like an hour.
It's due to every hyperscalar building out new AI datacenters. For example you have Google recently saying things like "Google tells employees it must double capacity every 6 months to meet AI demand", and that they need to increase capacity by 1000x within 4-5 years.
If you are a scifi author, it's a mistake to give any hard numbers in real-world units. You will, most likely, greatly underestimate. Even trying to greatly overestimate, you will underestimate.
Commander Data's specifications in the Star Trek TNG episode The Measure of a Man from 1989: 800 quadrillion bits of storage, computing at 60 trillion operations per second.
100 petabytes. That's a big machine. A very big machine. But supercomputers now have memories measured in petabytes.
They never used "bits" again in any Star Trek script. It was kiloquads and gigaquads from then on.
That's fun! To further prove your point I saw this and thought "yeah maybe 100 PB is more common these days but 60 trillion ops / second seems like a lot"
Then I did some googling and it turns out that a single 5090 GPU has a peak FP32 performance of over 100 TFLOPS!
RAM prices are cyclical. We are in the under supply part of the cycle.
People just have to wait. As prices are sky high, production capacity will likely increase. Some AI companies will go bust. Demand will plummet and we will buy RAM for pennies while the market consolidates.
That's historically what happened when we had proper competition. Now we have a 3 party oligopoly and massive barriers to entry. Now at least 1 of the 3 is actively signalling than they're not going to not going to spend 100s of billions to expand fab capacity that will lower their profits because if one does it they'll all do it. It's a prisoner dilemma, and they're co-operating. When they co-operate we all lose.
That is also somewhat true for GPUs, hard drives and SSDs. They all usually have different cycles but today AI is making them peak all at the same time.
never fully, like with GPU, it a semi-cartel, it's in everything including you high performance SSD (as cache) they have a reason for them being supper high for ~2 years then they will go down but only "somewhat", lets say if the peak it >2x pricing the price in 2027 will be ~1.5x-1.8x price.
And because everything needs prices expect all electronics to be ~20%-80% more expensive in 2027 compared to today, naturally this includes the profit margin.
and naturally every regulation related companies don't like will supposedly be at fault for this (e.g. right to repair)
I bought 32GB of DDR5 SODIMM last year for 108€ on Amazon. The exact same product that I bought back then is now 232€ on Amazon. I don't like this ride.
Yeah, similar for me. I bought 64 gigs of DDR5 laptop RAM about a year ago; it ended up costing about $190. Now the exact same listing is going for $470. https://a.co/d/fJH1GkW
I guess I'm glad I bought when I did; didn't realize how good of a deal I was getting.
I'm just glad I pulled the trigger on an upgrade cycle earlier this year instead of waiting another year on the coming spring. the memory kid that was $329 a few months ago is now close to $1200 (2x48gb @ 6000 CL30).
I picked up a PS5 today on a Black Friday deal for 350EUR. 32GB DDR5 is at around 280EUR at the moment.
I have a gaming PC, it runs Linux because (speaking as a Microsoft sysadmin with 10 years under my belt) I hate what Windows has become, but on commodity hardware it’s not quite there for me. Thought I’d play the PlayStation backlog while I wait for the Steam Machine.
Probably not at all since the RAM on Apple’s chips is on die, meaning they manufacture it themselves with the chip. They’re not beholden to RAM manufacturer pricing. Arguably they could raise prices just because RAM has gotten more expensive and they want to match, but I doubt it given the crazy high margins they already charge for it.
Is it really a shortage, rather than unfair order fulfillment, when it's just four companies buying up everything? There's plenty of RAM, it's just getting sold to the people who yell the loudest instead of going "sorry we have more customers than just you" and fulfilling orders to everyone.
I bought right after this curve hit, like the day after. I went into Microcenter for a new PC w/64gb ddr5. The day before, their kits were ~$189. The day I bought they were $360. Now the same kit on Newegg is $530.
He’ll have pissed off a lot of very rich and powerful people once they’re forced to accept that they’ll still need us plebes in the end, does he have a way out when that happens?
LLM models are voracious consumers of RAM for the top full power models so yes, not directly but they're all consuming massive amounts of the production capacity of memory makers it's impacting the 'gaming RAM' market too. They're not separate markets just because the end use is slightly different.
The article references the original coverage which talks to this:
> Despite server-grade RDIMM memory and HBM being the main attractions for hardware manufacturers building AI servers, the entire memory industry, including DDR5, is being affected by price increases. The problem for consumers is that memory manufacturers are shifting production prioritization toward datacenter-focused memory types and producing less consumer-focused DDR5 memory as a result.
But I'm sure the hysteria around that isn't helping prices come back down either.
Call me old-fashioned, but I shouldn't have to have a stock broker to buy a computer. Maybe we could re-organize society to be a bit less ridiculous. "Quick reminder that you could've been born rich instead of a povvo."
Potentially unpopular take: memory manufacturers have been operating on the margins of profitability for quite a while now. Their products are essentially an indistinguishable commodity. Memory from Samsung or Micron or another manufacturer may have slight differences in overclockability, but that matters little to folks who just want a stable system. Hopefully the shortage leads large purchasers to engage in long-term contracts with the memory manufacturers which give them the confidence to invest in new fabs and increased capacity. That would be great for everyone. Additionally, we're likely to see Chinese fab'd DRAM now, which they've been attempting since the '70s but never been competitive at. With these margins, any new manufacturer could gain a foothold.
If LLMs' utility continues to scale with size (which seems likely as we begin training embodied AI on a massive influx of robotic sensor data) then it will continue to gobble up memory for the near future. We may need both increased production capacity _and_ a period of more efficient software development techniques as was the case when a new 512kb upgrade cost $1,000.
> Hopefully the shortage leads large purchasers to engage in long-term contracts with the memory manufacturers which give them the confidence to invest in new fabs and increased capacity.
Most DRAM is already purchased through contracts with manufacturers.
Manufacturers don't actually want too many extremely long term contracts because it would limit their ability to respond to market price changes.
Like most commodities, the price you see on places like Newegg follows the "spot price", meaning the price to purchase DRAM for shipment immediately. The big players don't buy their RAM through these channels, they arrange contracts with manufacturers.
The contracts with manufacturers will see higher prices in the future, but they're playing the long game and will try to delay or smooth out purchasing to minimize exposure to this spike.
> Additionally, we're likely to see Chinese fab'd DRAM now, which they've been attempting since the '70s but never been competitive at.
Companies like Samsung and SK Hynix have DRAM fabs in China already. This has been true for decades. You may have Chinese fab'd DRAM in the computer you're using right now.
Are you referring to complete home-grown DRAM designs? That, too, was already in the works.
I don't agree with this sentence. Why would not the same apply advice to oil and gas contracts? If you look at the size and duration of oil and gas contracts for major energy importers, they often run 10 years or more. Some of the contracts in Japan and Korea are so large, that a heavy industrial / chemical customers will take an equity stake in the extraction site.
Except silicon, power, and water (and a tiny amount of plastic/paper for packaging), what else does a fab need that only produces DRAM? If true, then power is far and away the most variable input cost.
27 replies →
> Are you referring to complete home-grown DRAM designs? That, too, was already in the works.
Yes, via cxmt as discussed by Asianometry here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mt-eDtFqKvk
As I mentioned, various groups within China have been working on China-native DRAM since the '70s. What's new are the margins and market demand to allow them to be profitable with DRAM which is still several years behind the competition.
1 reply →
I've just remembered a similar situation in 1993!
A Japanese factory that made epoxy resin for chips was destroyed and the price of SIMM chips skyrocketed (due to lack of availability).
I remember being very upset that I wasn't going to be able to upgrade to 4MB.
There should be a t-shirt for that ;-) I remember paying insane prices that year.
Well, what really prompted this crisis is AI, as well as Samsung shutting down some production (and I have to say I don't think they mind that the pricing has skyrocketed as a result!)
But yes we're going to need more fabs for sure
> Well, what really prompted this crisis is AI,
If the shortage of RAM is because of AI (so servers/data centers I presume?), wouldn't that mean the shortage should be localized to RDIMM rather than the much more common UDIMM that most gaming PCs use? But it seems to me like the pricing is going up more for UDIMM than RDIMM.
22 replies →
It's a sad trend for "the rest of us" and history in general. The economic boom of the 80's thru the 2010s has been a vast democratization of computation - hardware became more powerful and affordable, and algorithms (at least broadly if not individually) became more efficient. We all had supercomputers in our pockets. This AI movement seems to move things in the opposite direction, in that us plebeians have less and less access to RAM, computing power and food and...uh...GPUs to play Cyberpunk; and are dependent on Altermanic aristocracy to dribble compute onto us at their leisure and for a hefty tithe.
I am hoping some of that Clayton Christensen disruption the tech theocracy keep preaching about comes along with some O(N) decrease in transformer/cDNN complexity that disrupts the massive server farms required for this AI boom/bubble thing.
> This AI movement seems to move things in the opposite direction, in that us plebeians have less and less access to RAM, computing power and food and...uh...GPUs to play Cyberpunk; and are dependent on Altermanic aristocracy to dribble compute onto us at their leisure and for a hefty tithe.
Compute is cheaper than ever. The ceiling is just higher for what you can buy.
Yes, we have $2000 GPUs now. You don't have to buy it. You probably shouldn't buy it. Most people would be more than fine with the $200-400 models, honestly. Yet the fact that you could buy a $2000 GPU makes some people irrationally angry.
This is like the guy I know who complains that pickup trucks are unfairly priced because a Ford F-150 has an MSRP of $80,000. It doesn't matter how many times you point out that the $80K price tag only applies to the luxury flagship model, he anchors his idea of how much a pickup truck costs to the highest number he can see.
Computing is cheaper than ever. The power level is increasing rapidly, too. The massive AI investments and datacenter advancements are pulling hardware development forward at an incredible rate and we're winning across the board as consumers. You don't have to buy that top of the line GPU nor do you have to max out the RAM on your computer.
Some times I think people with this mentality would be happier if the top of the line GPU models were never released. If nVidia stopped at their mid-range cards and didn't offer anything more, the complaints would go away even though we're not actually better off with fewer options.
15 replies →
One can see it that way, granted. When I zoom all the way out, all of consumer computation has existed as sort of an addendum or ancillary organ to the big customers: government, large corporations, etc. All our beloved consumer tech started out as absurdly high priced niche stuff for them. We've been sold the overflow capacity and binned parts. And that seems to be a more-or-less natural consequence of large purchasers signing large checks and entering predictable contracts. Individual consumers are very price sensitive and fickle by comparison. From that perspective, anything that increases overall capacity should also increase the supply of binned parts and overflow. Which will eventually benefit consumers. Though the intervening market adjustment period may be painful (as we are seeing). Consumers have also benefited greatly from the shrinking of component sizes, as this has had the effect of increasing production capacity with fixed wafer volume.
23 replies →
>We all had supercomputers in our pockets.
You still do. There is no "AI movement" you need to participate in. You can grab a copy of SICP and a banged up ten year old thinkpad and compute away, your brain will thank you. It's like when people complain that culture is unaffordable because the newest Marvel movie tickets cost 50 bucks, go to the library or standardebooks.org, the entire Western canon is free
1 reply →
Well put. Since the 1980's consumer has been driving the segment. Even supercomputers were built out of higher end consumer hardware (or playstations in one example).
The move to cloud computing and now AI mean that we're back in the mainframe days.
True, it is reminiscent of a time before me when people were lucky to have mainframe access through university. To be fair this was a long time in the making with the also quite aggressive move to cloud computing. While I don't mind having access to free AI tools, they seem to start taking possession of the content as well
[dead]
It's not like you need 64GB to have "democratized computation". We used to have 64MB and that was plenty. Unfortunately, software got slower more quickly than hardware got quicker.
9 replies →
"memory manufacturers have been operating on the margins of profitability for quite a while now."
The manufacturers are scumbags is more likely answer.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_price_fixing_scandal
I don't disagree per-se, but this is the sort of thing which happens when only a few businesses exist in a commodity market with high entry costs. IOW, it's not great, but it is predictable. See: Oil.
3 replies →
There is a zero lower bound on the interest rate. Excess capital means negative returns on capital. The money system can't express the state of the real world so either companies close down until the yield is positive, or the companies pass on the artificial minimum price onto the consumer. In both cases, the real world is forced to match the state of the money system.
Being shocked that companies try their best to deal with the bad cards they have been dealt with should be expected. The money system simply cannot express the concept of surplus capital or abundance. Positive interest means capital is scarce, so capital must be made scarce even if there is abundance.
Before you come up with the argument that the interest rate is supposed to reflect a market property and therefore does not force itself upon the market, remember that I said that there is an artificial restriction in the money system that prevents the state of the real market to be expressed. The non-profit economy has never had a chance to exist, because our tools are too crude.
The non-profit economy includes resilient production with slight/minor overproduction.
Think about how stupid the idea of a guaranteed 0% yield bond is (aka cash). The government obligates itself to accept an infinite amount of debt if the real return on capital would ever fall negative. No wonder it has an incentive to inflate the value of the bond away.
I wonder how long it will take for China to flood the market with state-of-the-art modules. It's a pretty decent opportunity for them. They probably can hasten the build of new fabs more than many other nations.
But my guess is that this shortage is short-lived (mostly because of the threat above). There's no OPEC for tech.
1 reply →
You mean “capitalists”.
Maximizing profit is the only sane way to play a rigged game
DRAM already has a spot price, because it is a commodity.
https://www.trendforce.com/price/dram/dram_spot
Manufacturing is based on anticipating demand.
Unforseen things like the pandemic hurt profits.
Letting things go this unmanaged with a 3 year run way for AI demand seems a little hard to understand. In this case, not anticipating demand seems to creates more profit.
I find it hard to believe the pandemic hurt the profits of computing hardware, demand went up from it not down.
1 reply →
https://videocardz.com/newz/chinese-cxmt-to-produce-ddr5-800...
For some reason it never crossed my mind that there would be futures for DRAM the same way there is for gold and silver.
So this would have been great may be 15 years ago, or am I mistaken? New fabs for DRAM would take a while, no?
[dead]
[dead]
I guess we'll just have to stop making computer memory if it ceases to be profitable. The market is so efficient.
So, like, we were already pretty much priced out of higher-end graphic cards, and now it's happening to RAM. All this while jobs are disappearing, layoffs are ongoing and CEOs are touting AI's 'capabilities' left and right.
Next is probably CPUs, even if AIs don't use them that much, manufactures will shift production to something more profitable, then gouge prices so that only enterprises will pay for them.
What's next? Electricity?
Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world? /rant
Maybe that is the answer to how things are supposed to work if AI replaces everyone and no one can afford to buy their stuff.
Things being too cheap allows money to pool at the bottom in little people's hands in the forms of things like "their homes" and "their computers" and "their cars".
You don't really want billions in computing hardware (say) being stashed down there in inefficient, illiquid physical form, you want it in a datacentre where it can be leveraged, traded, used as security, etc. If it has to be physically held down there, ideally it should be expensive, leased and have a short lifespan. The higher echelons seem apparently to think they can drive economic activity by cycling money at a higher level amongst themselves rather than looping in actual people.
This exact price jump seems largely like a shock rather then a slow squeeze, but I think seeing some kind of reversal of the unique 20th century "life gets better/cheaper/easier every generation".
I very much disagree that consumers holding more hardware capabilities than they need is a bad thing. Replace computing hardware with mechanical tools, because they are basically tools, and consider if consumers be better off if wrenches and saw blades and machine tools were held more exclusively by business and large corporations. Would corporations use them more often? Probably. And yet it seems pretty clear that it would hurt the capabilities of regular people to not be able to fix things themselves or innovate outside of a corporate owned lab.
To me the #1 most important factor in a maintaining a prosperous and modern society is common access to tools by the masses, and computing hardware is just the latest set of tools.
2 replies →
Until I got the last part, I actually thought you were being serious.
1 reply →
> Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world?
In the hands of the owners of the AI, as a direct consequence of the economic system. It was never going to play out any other way.
Yeah, I'm always confused why programmers seem to like this technology given the vast negative consequences it will likely have for us. The upsides on the other hand seem to be the most insignificant things.
13 replies →
Ding ding ding. What a surprise that a system designed not for human flourishing but pure profit would actually deliver massive profit with no regard for human flourishing.
Humanity will have to adopt new human-focused modes of living and organizing society, or else. And climate change is coming along to make sure the owning class can't ignore this fact any longer.
14 replies →
> In the hands of the owners of the AI
With a hundred bucks and a Robinhood account, you too can be part of this greedy, evil and mysterious "owners of AI" class and (maybe) some day enjoy the promised spoils.
Oh the wonders of Capitalism, the economic system offering unequal abundance to everyone caring to take part... Where are the other, much touted systems, masters at spreading misery equally?
> What's next? Electricity?
Yes. My electricity prices jumped 50% in 3 years.
https://www.linkedin.com/posts/mikesimoncasey_our-team-at-re...?
How much is due to long overdue infrastructure upgrades and greed by providers, vs the cost of energy?
Also, consumer prices _have_ risen (mine included), but it's not clear that this is only because AI. While EV charging is not at the scale of all data centers combined, it seems to grow even faster than the datacenter's consumption, and is expected to eclipse the latter around 2030. Maybe sooner due to missing solar incentives.
Also, to rant on: According to [1], an average Gemini query costs about 0.01 cents (Figure 2 - say 6000 queries per kWh at 60 cents/kWh, which is probably more than the industrial consumers pay). The same paper says one other providers is not off by that much. I dare say that at least for me, I definitely save a lot of time and effort with these queries than I'd traditionally have to (go to library, manually find sources on the web, etc), so arguably, responsibly used, AI is really quite environmentally friendly.
Finally: Large data centers and their load is actually a bit fungible, so they can be used to stabilize the grid, as described in [2].
I would think it would be best if there were more transparency on where the costs come from and how they can be externalized fairly. To give one instance, Tesla could easily [3] change their software to monitor global grid status and adjust charging rates. Did it happen ? Not that I know. That could have a huge effect on grid stability. With PowerShare, I understand that vehicles can also send energy back to power the house - hence, also offload the grid.
[1] https://services.google.com/fh/files/misc/measuring_the_envi...
[2] https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7358514...
[3] that's most likely a wild exaggeration
2 replies →
Rooftop solar doesn’t get more expensive over time.
1 reply →
In the share prices. Hope you're rich, because that's the only thing the economy cares about.
Many apps support buying fractional shares. You don't have to be rich to buy shares in public companies.
14 replies →
> What's next? Electricity?
That and water. Electricity: Google made a post about scaling k8s to 135.000 nodes yesterday, mentioning how each node has multiple GPUs taking up 2700 watts max.
Water, well this is a personal beef, but Microsoft built a datacenter which used potable / drinking water for backup cooling, using up millions of liters during a warm summer. They treat the water and dump it in the river again. This was in 2021, I can imagine it's only gotten worse again: https://www.aquatechtrade.com/news/industrial-water/microsof...
Is any datacenter's water use significant compared to other industrial installations? According to that article, all datacenters in North Holland use 550 Ml/yr. North Holland has 2.95M residents [0], who use 129 l/person-day [1], 47 Kl/person-year, 139,000 Ml/year for the whole region. So the data centers use an estimated 0.4% of the region's water. Data centers use about 3% of the Netherlands' electricity.
Why do you think this is a lot of water? What are the alternatives to pulling from the local water utility and are those alternatives preferable?
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Holland
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Water_supply_and_sanitation_in...
[2] https://www.dutchdatacenters.nl/en/statistics-2/
Ram is a commodity they have spikes in demand/shortage of supply which drive the price up like this.
I remember when there was a flood somewhere in Thailand in the 2011 and the prices of hardisks went up through the roof.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/tomcoughlin/2011/10/17/thailand...
The abundance is there, it just isn't for you or other working class people
You thought that abundance would trickle down into the pockets of people that have to work for a living?
AI will lead to abundance. For those that own stuff and no longer have to pay for other people to work for them.
> abundance. For those that own stuff and no longer have to pay for other people to work for them.
Why are you saying that? Anybody working for a living (but saving money) can invest in AI stocks or ETFs and partake in that potential abundance. Robinhood accounts are free for all.
6 replies →
Electricity prices are already skyrocketing, it's present - not next.
Yes electricity by more short-sighted, dirty methods (remember when crypto clowns bought an old fossil plant just for coin mining?) but more alarming, fresh water.
That can be a bigger problem for civilization.
>What's next? Electricity?
next?
https://www.cnbc.com/2025/11/14/data-centers-are-concentrate...
"Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world?"
more money for shareholder, 5 Trillion Nvidia???? more like a quadrillion for nvidia market cap
>Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world?
That'll come with the bubble bursting and the mass sell off.
Drive prices have already exploded. New hard drives have doubled in price since the beginning of the year. I haven't checked SSD prices, but why would they not be crazy, too?
The AI bubble has also pushed up secondhand prices. I work in ewaste recycling. Two weeks ago, a petabyte's worth of hard drives showed up. After erasing, testing, listing, and selling them, I'll have a very merry Christmas.
I picked a really great time to give up PC Gaming for writing.
Given that everyone already answered what I had in mind, what can we do about it? What happened in the past where we might get answers from?
After the supply constraints of the post-covid period, are graphics cards really that more expensive?
How long do you estimate this period of supply constraint will be? Will manufacturers continue to be greedy, or will they grow less greedy as the supply improves based on the price signals the high price indicates?
Sounds like a business opportunity for someone to come in and scale better.
That's what happens when demand is higher than supply.
> Where the f*k is all the abundance that AI was supposed to bring into the world? /rant
It may have been a bit self-deprecating, but I think your “rant” is a more than justified question that really should be expanded well beyond just this matter. It’s related to a clear fraud that has been perpetrated upon the people of the western world in particular for many decades and generations now in many different ways. We have been told for decades and generations that “we have to plunder your money and debase of and give it to the rich that caused the {insert disaster caused by the ruling class} misery and we have to do it without any kind of consequences for the perpetrators and no, you don’t get any kind of ownership or investment and we have to do it now or the world will end”
In world history, the vast majority of abundance is downstream of conquest, not innovation. Plunder makes profit. Even in weird moments like today, where innovation is (or, at least, was) genuinely the driving force of abundance, that innovation would not have come about without the seed capital of Europe plundering Africa and the Americas.
Abundance isn't even the right framing. What most people actually want and need is a certain amount of resources - after which their needs are satiated and they move onto other endeavors. It's the elites that want abundance - i.e. infinite growth forever. The history of early agriculture is marked by hunter-gatherers outgrowing their natural limits, transitioning to farming, and then people figuring out that it's really fucking easy to just steal what others grow. Abundance came from making farmers overproduce to feed an unproductive elite. Subsistence farming gave way to farming practices that overtaxed the soil or risked crop failure.
The history of technology had, up until recently, bucked this trend. Computers got better and cheaper every 18 months because we had the time and money to exploit electricity and lithography to produce smaller computers that used less energy. This is abundance from innovation. The problem is, most people don't want abundance; the most gluttonous need for computational power can be satisfied with a $5000 gaming rig. So the tech industry has been dealing with declining demand, first with personal computers and then with smartphones.
AI fixes this problem, by being an endless demand for more and more compute with the economic returns to show for it. When AI people were talking about abundance, they were primarily telling their shareholders: We will build a machine that will make us kings of the new economy, and your equity shares will grant you seats in the new nobility. In this new economy, labor doesn't matter. We can automate away the entire working and middle classes, up to and including letting the new nobles hunt them down from helicopters for sport.
Ok, that's hyperbole. But assuming the AI bubble doesn't pop, I will agree that affordable CPUs are next on the chopping block. If that happens, modular / open computing is dead. The least restrictive computing environment normal people can afford will be a Macbook, solely because Apple has so much market power from iPhones that they can afford to keep the Mac around for vanity. We will get the dystopia RMS warned about, not from despotic control over computing, but from the fact that nobody will be able to afford to own their own computer anymore. Because abundance is very, very expensive.
It’s not hyperbole
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c246pv2n25zo
Actually, this seems to be mostly a spike in retail prices, not wholesale DRAM contracts that are only up 60% or so in the past few months according to Samsung. So we should most likely place at least some fraction of the blame on our fellow consumers for overreacting to the news and hoarding RAM at overinflated prices. DRAM sticks are the new toilet paper.
> Actually, this seems to be mostly a spike in retail prices, not wholesale DRAM contracts that are only up 60% or so in the past few months according to Samsung. So we should most likely place at least some fraction of the blame on our fellow consumers for overreacting to the news and hoarding RAM at overinflated prices. DRAM sticks are the new toilet paper.
What is your source on that? Moore's Law is Dead directly contradicts your claims by saying that OpenAI has purchased unfinished wafers to squeeze the market.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BORRBce5TGw
1 reply →
"only" ? Nobody is hoarding RAM (at least yet, consumers seem mostly blindsided by it), this is directly caused by industry thirst for AI
1 reply →
I used to sell 64kbit (yes, bit) DRAM at $7 in 1982. 1 year later was <$0.50.
The memory business is a pure commodity and brutally cyclic. Big profit => build a fab => wait 2 years => oh shit, everyone else did it => dump units at below cost. Repeat.
Then you have “acts of God” like that time when a flood or fire or something caused the only factory in the world that produced some obscure part of memory chips to stop production and memory costs double almost overnight. I remember my 4 -> 32 MB back in the 90s cost a fortune because of this.
A great example for the pork cycle.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pork_cycle
I've often heard it refer to as the bullwhip effect, I think it was this one https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullwhip_effect
Old enough here to remember Intel exiting the DRAM business.
Same! And then they made new eDRAM for a hot minute as part of Crystal Well. It'd be fun to see them get back into the game in a serious way, but their on-again-off-again attitude toward dGPUs does not give me confidence in their ability to execute on such long-term plans.
Old enough here to remember Intel entering the DRAM business :-)
Hardware is faster, but the "abstraction tax" is higher than ever.
As someone currently fighting to shave megabytes off a C++ engine, it hurts my soul to see a simple chat app (Electron) consume 800MB just to idle. We spent the last decade using Moore's Law to subsidize lazy garbage collection, five layers of virtualization, and shipping entire web browsers as application runtimes. The computer is fast, but the software is drowning it.
At least the price hikes will put some emphasis on RAM usage.
Safari is still leaking memory where a single tab managed to use 50GB regardless of which website it is.
Built my son's first gaming PC 2 months ago. Figured it would be cheaper around Black Friday, but the prices were reasonable enough that we didn't wait. Turned out to be a huge savings to buy that fast DDR5 in September.
Just went through this today for my daughter- struggled to find an i5 not on pre-order, and the RAM was crippling- ended up going Ryzen 7 for a first time and 2x8Gb DDR5 6000 @ £119 - looking forward to building it with her!
Ryzen is the better choice anyway :)
Props on building a PC with your kid, I have very fond memories of doing that with my dad. Have fun!
1 reply →
This is really crazy. I built my first computer not too long ago; like I'm talking less than a month maybe, definitely less than 2. I paid $320 for 64GB Kit (CMK64GX5M2B5600C40) at Microcenter. It is now sold out in Chicago store and listed at $530.
$760 on NewEgg! Yeeezus Christ. Literally 50% of what I spent on the entire build just on RAM.
2 replies →
I bought 64GB of DDR5 two weeks ago. That same RAM is now twice the price.
I wish I would have done what you did. Especially since I wanted 128GB. Now I am probably going to settle for 64GB or maybe 96GB.
The better play would've been to buy Bay Area real estate in the 1970s, but what're you gonna do? lights cigarette
I wanted to build a gaming PC around summer, to be able play with my son, but I postponed it for no real reason. I built this PC a 2 weeks ago, so instead of paying 250 pln (~$70 usd) for 32 GB RAM, I paid 899 pln (~$250). Now, exactly the same RAM costs 1099 pln (~$300).
I bought 32GB x 2 of G.SKILL a year ago and paid $204. Now it's $600. Insane
Just checked my invoice from last year, $316 CAD for 2x32GB 5600MHz DDR5 ECC UDIMMs.
I'm now seeing $480 CAD for a single stick.
I just got one of the last beelink ser-8s with 64gb for $750. They sold out by the time my order arrived. The newer ones are starting around 830 for a 32gb machine (admittedly with newer everything)
In case anyone else wanted to check, PS5 has[1]:
> Memory: 16 GB GDDR6 SDRAM
So unless the RAM price jumps to 4x the price of a PS5, getting a PS5 is not the most cost efficient way to get to 64 GB of RAM.
In comparison, PS3 has been used to build cheap clusters[2].
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_5
[2]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3_cluster
Yes, stupid comparison really. Also 64GB is pretty high-end from a consumer perspective. Most would do just fine with 32 as 2x16GB.
Maybe if they expect to upgrade within a few years it would be fine. But when I built my current computer 11 years ago I also didn't expect to need 16 gb of ram and only bought 8. 5 years later 16 gb of memory was a requirement for both software and games I was playing. And now 11 years later 16 gigs is not enough for fairly "simple" 3d modelling and 32 gigs is pretty close to the minimum requirement to fully utilize other modern hardware.
2 replies →
I bought 2x16gb for my home computer at $90 about three months ago. When I checked the price of the exact thing I bought just in the past day, it's now $270. The price increase is across the board whether it's a low end or high end build.
When did a PS5 become a unit of cost? For reference seems to be about 0.002 London buses
I think it's intended as a comparison of cost when building a gaming-capable computer vs. a console of somewhat equivalent power.
It used to be a general rule of thumb that you could build a computer of roughly equivalent power for the cost of a game console, or a little more — now the memory costs more than the whole console.
> I think it's intended as a comparison of cost when building a gaming-capable computer vs. a console of somewhat equivalent power.
The PS5 has 16GB of RAM. One can buy 16GB of RAM for ~$100 [1].
[1] https://pcpartpicker.com/product/9fgFf7/kingston-fury-beast-...
3 replies →
It still is a rule of thumb, you dont need DDR5 for a gaming computer let alone 64gb. A low end am4 cpu + 16gb of DD4 3600 and a decent gpu will beat a ps5 in performance and cost. I dont understand why the headline made this strange comparison.
8 replies →
It doesn't help that GPUs have also generally gone up over the past decade because there's more market for them besides gaming, along with how they benefit from being hugely parallel and the larger you can make them the better, and fabrication costs are shooting up. I think there was a GamersNexus video at the launch of one of the previous GPU generations that noted that there was a move from "more for your money" each generation towards "more for more", i.e. keeping the value roughly static and increasing the amount they charged for a more capable product.
To be fair, if this keeps up, expect the price of a PS5 to skyrocket too.
3 replies →
Give it a month or two and it might be cheaper to get the bus.
It's a more stable unit than US dollars.
> When did a PS5 become a unit of cost? For reference seems to be about 0.002 London buses
Gaming consoles are something people buy. Any parent or gamer has an idea what they cost.
People do not buy London Buses themself
Seems like an American thing. We measure distances in football fields and volumes in olympic pools, seems we now measure money in PS5s. It tracks...
Never.
That's a an analogy-- a literary technique the writer is using, to show the correspondence between the price of a specific amount of DDR5 RAM to a fully integrated system, so the reader can follow the conclusions of their article easier.
Approximately the instant when a single component (RAM) of a comparable product (Gaming PC) became more expensive than the entirety of said product.
I wonder what you'd think if bus tires exploded in price and started costing .25 London busses per tire.
The tech equivalent to the Big Mac index? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Mac_Index
Had me chuckling at that London bus comment.
Lots of people are speculating that the price spike is AI related. But it might be more mundane:
I'd bet that a good chunk of the apparently sudden demand spike could be last month's Microsoft Windows 10 end-of-support finally happening, pushing companies and individuals to replace many years worth of older laptops and desktops all at once.
I worked in enterprise laptop repair two decades ago — I like your theory (and there's definitely meat there) but my experience was that if a system's OEM configuration wasn't enough to run modern software, we'd replace the entire system (to avoid bottlenecks elsewhere in the architecture).
Perhaps the memory manufacturers have seen how much Apple gets away with charging for the memory on their laptops and have decided to copy them ;-)
I have no idea about the number of people this has actually affected, but this is exactly my situation. Need a new workstation with a bunch of RAM to replace my Win10 machine, so I don't really have viable options than paying the going rate.
It’s not speculation, but it could also be both.
It will be interesting to see the knock on effect of some upcoming consumer electronics; for example Apple was rumored to be working on a cheaper MacBook that uses an iPad CPU, and Valve is working on a SteamOS based gaming machine. Both will likely live/die based on price.
It's way too early to assume these prices are permanent. It's a supply crunch meeting a demand spike. The market will find equilibrium.
Big manufacturers also order their DRAM in advance with contractually negotiated pricing. They're not paying these spot market prices for every computer they ship.
edit: looks like i had the wrong understanding, thanks to the comments below for explaining
~~~~~helps that Apple's SoC has the RAM on the main die itself. They're probably immune from these price hikes, but a lot of the PC/Windows vendors would, which would only make Apple's position even stronger~~~~
They're probably immune for a while because they're probably using a long term contract, but when it comes time to renew they'll have to offer close to market price to convince the manufacturers not to use that fab space for more profitable memory.
How does that make a difference? It's not like the price change is on DIMMs. The price change is on the DRAM, which is a commodity item. It's not like someone is going to discount it if you tell them "nah, I'm going to solder this one to my SoC".
If Apple is insulated it is likely because Apple signs big contracts for large supply and manufacturers would prefer to be insulated from short-term demand shocks and have some reliability that their fabs can keep running and producing profitable chips.
I also had that misunderstanding, so after seeing this comment I looking up info. In this article you can see the xray of the m1 chip composited onto the photo of the chip, which has external memory components. You can also see in the architecture diagram that the memory is attached from outside the area where the Fabric, CPU, GPU, NPU, cache, and some other unlabeled things are located. https://www.macrumors.com/guide/m1/
And in this article you can see a photo of the memory chips attached outside of the Apple component https://www.gizmochina.com/2020/11/19/apple-mac-mini-teardow...
Perhaps on the same package (stacked) but absolutely not on the same die.
Which Apple product is this? Memory dies and logic dies require entirely different factories to make, so I doubt this SoC exists.
1 reply →
I just checked how much I paid around 12 months ago for Crucial 96GB kit (2x48GB ddr5 5600 so-dimm). Was $224, same kit today I see listed at $592, wild :/
This is insane!
I got 2 sticks of 16GB DDR4 SODIMM for €65.98 back in February. The same two sticks in the same store now cost €186
Same, bought in August for $250 (EU), now it's ~$840. I ended up returning the laptop I'd bought it for and thought 'why hold on to the RAM, it'll only depreciate in value,' so I returned that too. Better hold on to my PS5, I guess.
I bought 2x 32 GB DDR5 in august for $150, Now its $440. I dodged a HUGE bullet.
I did buy 384 GB worth of Samsung DDR5-4800 sticks for my homelab a few months ago. I was wondering at the time if I really needed it, well ended up using it anyway, and turns out, dodged a bullet big time.
Just bought that exact kit for my Minisforum 790S7 build at the eye watering $592... Kicking myself as I was just starting to contemplate it early Oct but not yet seriously looking
96GB 6400, 380€ 2023-11
The silver lining is that hopefully it’ll become too expensive to ship new Electron apps
You have too much faith in the software industry.
This. Users and developers will just get accustomed to 2s delays everywhere. The era of native software is long gone.
1 reply →
RAM has been cheap long enough and now no one remembers how to write efficient GUI apps.
I'm joking, but only kind of. It's not a domain that I do a lot of, but I haven't touched Qt in so long that it would basically be starting from scratch if I tried to write an app with it; I could write an Election app in like an hour.
You can learn how to build a gui in Xcode or Visual Studio in a few hours
Why do you think developers would care if it's expensive to users?
There was a time
It's crazy how much RAM has inflated in the last month. I checked the price history of a few DDR5 kits and most have tripled since September.
Why specifically just now? It doesn't seem that much has materially changed very recently.
It's due to every hyperscalar building out new AI datacenters. For example you have Google recently saying things like "Google tells employees it must double capacity every 6 months to meet AI demand", and that they need to increase capacity by 1000x within 4-5 years.
The oft-snickered-at "smuggling 3mb of hot RAM" line from Neuromancer may have been prophetic after all.
If you are a scifi author, it's a mistake to give any hard numbers in real-world units. You will, most likely, greatly underestimate. Even trying to greatly overestimate, you will underestimate.
Commander Data's specifications in the Star Trek TNG episode The Measure of a Man from 1989: 800 quadrillion bits of storage, computing at 60 trillion operations per second.
100 petabytes. That's a big machine. A very big machine. But supercomputers now have memories measured in petabytes.
They never used "bits" again in any Star Trek script. It was kiloquads and gigaquads from then on.
That's fun! To further prove your point I saw this and thought "yeah maybe 100 PB is more common these days but 60 trillion ops / second seems like a lot"
Then I did some googling and it turns out that a single 5090 GPU has a peak FP32 performance of over 100 TFLOPS!
Pretty sure Commander Data's software wasn't written in Electron so the hardware was enough :)
Noticed SSDs went up too. There's a "black friday" sales price for a 4TB crucial external drive that's at its highest price in 90 days.
Bad time if you need to build a computer.
RAM prices are cyclical. We are in the under supply part of the cycle.
People just have to wait. As prices are sky high, production capacity will likely increase. Some AI companies will go bust. Demand will plummet and we will buy RAM for pennies while the market consolidates.
That's historically what happened when we had proper competition. Now we have a 3 party oligopoly and massive barriers to entry. Now at least 1 of the 3 is actively signalling than they're not going to not going to spend 100s of billions to expand fab capacity that will lower their profits because if one does it they'll all do it. It's a prisoner dilemma, and they're co-operating. When they co-operate we all lose.
2 replies →
That is also somewhat true for GPUs, hard drives and SSDs. They all usually have different cycles but today AI is making them peak all at the same time.
Great, we can eat the RAM when we're all unemployed.
1 reply →
Article says:
Looking at it optimistically, you're probably going to find DDR5 at bargain prices again in 2027.
When do you think prices will recede again?
never fully, like with GPU, it a semi-cartel, it's in everything including you high performance SSD (as cache) they have a reason for them being supper high for ~2 years then they will go down but only "somewhat", lets say if the peak it >2x pricing the price in 2027 will be ~1.5x-1.8x price.
And because everything needs prices expect all electronics to be ~20%-80% more expensive in 2027 compared to today, naturally this includes the profit margin.
and naturally every regulation related companies don't like will supposedly be at fault for this (e.g. right to repair)
at least that is a wild speculation on my side
I built 4 systems between Jan-May for myself and family, very fortuitous timing, because no way would I be doing it now.
bc some people up top loved the idea of the old Smoot Hawley thing
Everyone should unsub from this AI frenzy, this is ridiculous
Sign me up. Where do I turn it off?
Crypto: GPUs
AI: RAM
Thanks for taking away years of affordable computing from people. Time is more valuable; there's no getting it back.
I am skeptical of the narrative that crypto caused GPU demand to meaningfully increase. I think it was always AI
"We have always been at war with Eastasia" ?
In addition to the demand from AI data centres, I believe this also contributes to the high price. https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/ssds/intel-samsun...
I bought 32GB of DDR5 SODIMM last year for 108€ on Amazon. The exact same product that I bought back then is now 232€ on Amazon. I don't like this ride.
Yeah, similar for me. I bought 64 gigs of DDR5 laptop RAM about a year ago; it ended up costing about $190. Now the exact same listing is going for $470. https://a.co/d/fJH1GkW
I guess I'm glad I bought when I did; didn't realize how good of a deal I was getting.
I thought a big factor with the AI hype is that hardware costs always go down. Is this not a huge red flag to investors?!
Ouch. Wondering if homelabs will be scavenged for unused RAM as even DDR4 is going up in price :(
I'm personally waiting for the first DDR5 heist. Breaking into a computer store and taking all of the RAM that isn't soldered down.
I’ve been selling the ddr4 I had lying around. Also consider removing some from desktop since I don’t really use 64gb.
I'm just glad I pulled the trigger on an upgrade cycle earlier this year instead of waiting another year on the coming spring. the memory kid that was $329 a few months ago is now close to $1200 (2x48gb @ 6000 CL30).
I picked up a PS5 today on a Black Friday deal for 350EUR. 32GB DDR5 is at around 280EUR at the moment.
I have a gaming PC, it runs Linux because (speaking as a Microsoft sysadmin with 10 years under my belt) I hate what Windows has become, but on commodity hardware it’s not quite there for me. Thought I’d play the PlayStation backlog while I wait for the Steam Machine.
Don't forget to play Astro's Playroom, it comes with the system and it's a blast.
Thanks, will do!
1 reply →
I'm waiting for the Apple TV 4k 4th gen. I think it might might be one or two more years, on top of the now three years from 3rd gen (2022).
AI/LLM companies will pay TSMC more than Apple is willing to further subsidize this neat little box.
It started with GPUs, then hard drives and now RAM.
It will probably take a while, but is the general public going to be priced out of computers eventually?
Unless they stop making DDR5 and come out with DDR6, I think prices should return to normal next year.
Shush, AI is good for all of us, don't you dare sow doubt about that.
AI is a net negative fnyor anyone not in on the grift.
Hang in there, abundance is on its way! /s
Abundance of PRs waiting for reviewers!
I've been calling it "the last great bubble" whenever discussing it with my family and friends. This is Peak Grift.
Why this shortage? Sudden demand increase? Issues with the supply of refined rare earth metals ?
Wow, I only paid $265 for 96GB of DDR5 back in April. Same brand (G.SKILL) as the kit in the article too.
Will this affect the prices of Macbook Pros and Mac Studios, especially the 512 GB version?
Probably not at all since the RAM on Apple’s chips is on die, meaning they manufacture it themselves with the chip. They’re not beholden to RAM manufacturer pricing. Arguably they could raise prices just because RAM has gotten more expensive and they want to match, but I doubt it given the crazy high margins they already charge for it.
They have been sort of dumping the ps5 slim diskless over here in the EU at 349 EUR.
I don't understand using a game console as a price comparison.
Can't be using the standard banana measurement for everything.
Who could think that high end PC can be an appreciating asset, huh
hmm, I have a 64GB 32GB*2 6400/cl32 kit I bought from newegg last year for $127 - 20% cashback.
for anyone looking for a deal, thank me later, buy asap
(no association, just trying to help, I am still using DDR4)
Is it really a shortage, rather than unfair order fulfillment, when it's just four companies buying up everything? There's plenty of RAM, it's just getting sold to the people who yell the loudest instead of going "sorry we have more customers than just you" and fulfilling orders to everyone.
"2026: Cost of manufacturing PC cases increases 60% due to increased demand from Optimus production line" or some other dumb shit
Sad for all of us =(
They actually mean 64GiB.
Holy crap.
I bought right after this curve hit, like the day after. I went into Microcenter for a new PC w/64gb ddr5. The day before, their kits were ~$189. The day I bought they were $360. Now the same kit on Newegg is $530.
It's been 2 weeks.
Ouch that’s painful. At least you didn’t buy it 2 weeks later!
Holy shit the 32GB DDR5 I bought late october for $110 is now $300
Felt like I overpaid at the time too. Wow
but can 64GB of DDR5 memory run Crysis? …I’ll see myself out
[dead]
[flagged]
He’ll have pissed off a lot of very rich and powerful people once they’re forced to accept that they’ll still need us plebes in the end, does he have a way out when that happens?
Did Sam Altman buy out all gaming RAM?
OpenAI bought 40% of all wafers. So yes.
https://www.tomshardware.com/pc-components/dram/openais-star...
LLM models are voracious consumers of RAM for the top full power models so yes, not directly but they're all consuming massive amounts of the production capacity of memory makers it's impacting the 'gaming RAM' market too. They're not separate markets just because the end use is slightly different.
No, but the factory capacity and raw materials needed to make that gaming dram is now under higher demand to make stuff like gddrx and hbm.
If a Bond villain bought all of the oil in the Middle East, would it affect prices in the US? (Yes, of course it would.)
This is purely price gouging because these rams are not ECC and server grade.
The article references the original coverage which talks to this:
> Despite server-grade RDIMM memory and HBM being the main attractions for hardware manufacturers building AI servers, the entire memory industry, including DDR5, is being affected by price increases. The problem for consumers is that memory manufacturers are shifting production prioritization toward datacenter-focused memory types and producing less consumer-focused DDR5 memory as a result.
But I'm sure the hysteria around that isn't helping prices come back down either.
Except when you have datacenters also building racks with desktop hardware. I believe that was hetzner?
Quick reminder that DRAM futures have existed since the 1980s so you all could have protected your price with calls.
Call me old-fashioned, but I shouldn't have to have a stock broker to buy a computer. Maybe we could re-organize society to be a bit less ridiculous. "Quick reminder that you could've been born rich instead of a povvo."
Most of us would be better with a fixed rate mortgage given risk reward. You dont buy a computer every month (unless you do but then that is rare)
where?
i deeply hope this is /s
Well the alternative is that GP solved the world hunger as people can just buy future food contracts to protect themselves from drought.
1 reply →