The Hacker News discussion reveals three primary, interconnected themes regarding the recent surge in RAM prices.
1. Extreme Price Inflation and Buyer's Remorse
The most dominant theme is the shock and disbelief surrounding the dramatic and rapid increase in the cost of both DDR4 and especially DDR5 memory modules. Many users lamented missing prime buying windows, resulting in significant financial regret.
- Supporting Quote: "I bought 2x 32 GB DDR5 in august for $150, Now its $440. I dodged a HUGE bullet." (Author:
NewsaHackO) - Supporting Quote: "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 :/" (Author:
radicality)
2. AI Datacenter Demand as the Primary Cause
Users quickly pinpointed the surge in demand from hyperscalers building out massive AI infrastructure as the root cause for the supply shortage and subsequent price hike. This demand is perceived to be outstripping current fabrication capacity.
- Supporting Quote: "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." (Author:
debazel) - Supporting Quote: "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!)" (Author:
wkat4242)
3. Skepticism Regarding Market Cycles and Oligopoly Behavior
There is significant cynicism regarding whether standard supply/demand cycles will correct the issue quickly, with users suspecting coordinated behavior or an oligopoly structure among manufacturers is preventing supply from meeting demand efficiently, leading to prolonged high prices.
- Supporting Quote: "When do you think prices will recede again? ... I checked the price history of a few DDR5 kits and most have tripled since September." (Author:
rkagererquoting an external source, followed by the user's own implied concern) - Supporting Quote: "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. They're co-operating. When they co-operate we all lose." (Author:
bryanlarsen)