DRAM prices are spiking, but I don't trust the industry's why

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Scale of the price spike (and personal experiences)

  • Multiple commenters report DDR5 kits nearly doubling or tripling in 2–4 months; some specific kits went from ~$200 to $500–600+ and then vanished from retail.
  • Several people regret not buying large kits earlier, or are now hoarding / flipping RAM from laptops and refurb channels.
  • Others note eBay and used markets haven’t fully caught up; many listings still reflect pre-spike pricing and sell quickly.

Collusion, cartels, and market power

  • Many point to past DRAM price-fixing cases and industry concentration as reason to distrust “AI demand” as the sole explanation.
  • The idea of tacit collusion is widely discussed: a few suppliers, high entry barriers, and shared incentives to keep supply tight and prices high.
  • Skeptics argue that when demand is this strong and capacity is full, undercutting makes no sense, so high prices don’t require coordination.
  • Others counter that when only a few firms control capacity, “restraint” can look very much like a cartel even without explicit agreements.

Demand drivers: AI, data centers, and cycles

  • One camp sees a classic semiconductor boom–bust cycle: prior oversupply led to cutbacks; now AI and data-center buildouts hit just as capacity is constrained.
  • Several commenters cite hyperscalers and a large OpenAI “Stargate”-style contract rumored to lock up a huge share of global DRAM wafers, triggering panic buying and hoarding (likened to toilet paper in 2020).
  • Technical discussion notes:
    • HBM and DRAM share fab resources; HBM’s higher margins pull capacity away from commodity RAM.
    • Inference, caches, and huge models drive system RAM demand, not just GPU HBM.
    • DDR4 → DDR5 transition and looming DDR6 reduce incentive to overbuild DDR5 capacity.

Competition, China, and long-term structure

  • Some highlight Chinese players (YMTC, CXMT) ramping NAND and DRAM, potentially grabbing significant share later and fueling future oversupply.
  • There’s debate over whether sanctions are slowing China; several say they mainly boost profits for incumbent suppliers.

Effects on consumers and the broader tech/AI story

  • Small buyers, hobbyists, and smaller OEMs are “squeezed out” while deep-pocketed AI firms get priority.
  • Frustration that repeated 3–5 year “cycles” at this magnitude suggest insufficient competition.
  • Broader argument emerges over whether AI is a genuine super-cycle or an unprofitable bubble whose hardware binge (including DRAM) could worsen or accelerate any crash.