Those are not normal pricing. Before the pricing collapse in early 2020, 96GB DDR5 would have cost about $450 to $500. And I will need to restate again the cost of DRAM hasn't really changed much in the past 20 years. Its price just goes up and down in cycles.

So in reality it is more like going from $500 to $1300. But consumer felt it was more like going from $200 to $1300.

Crucial are already selling DRAM made by CXMT. And China are already throwing money at it. I doubt the memory bubble will burst in next 12-24 months. As in going back to money losing DRAM pricing. As they will all pivot to HBM or other money making products. But the bulk of lower end consumer DDR5 or LPDDR5 will goes to Chinese Foundry. Assuming they have figure out how to do them well. Which they have improved but are still so far away from industry leaders.

Normally memory maker will push the next DDR standard to market just to push out Chinese competitors, I am not sure it will work the same this time around. DDR5 have plenty of other usage / demands.

Looking at the current prices, even of the same RAM, is just insane. Those companies really need to pay us compensation damage here. The whole "free market" notion does not work when you have de-facto monopolies and mega-corporations abuse average Joe and average Jane.

People used to get into gaming pcs as an affordable hobby, now it’s making general aviation look like plan B.

The reason memory prices can stay high for years in this mega cycle is because the 3 players will be very cautious on overbuilding. They’d rather under build, make great profit (not maximum) and reduce the risk of going bust if this suddenly ends.

Same for TSMC in chips.

Great opportunity for Chinese companies though. This shortage is exactly what Chinese companies need to scale.

Right now their opportunity cost is too high.

> risky it is to spin up a new fab

You don't need a new fab. You can build memory in 20 years old fab.

Most users don't seem to care about storing everything they generate in cloud services and this could easily be sold as an alternative to owning "expensive" desktop or laptop hardware.

If hyperscalers are using more RAM, and that RAM is not available for consumers, it means all the heavy stuff will happen in the cloud. Why would we want both the hyperscalers and consumers to have RAM simultaneously? Consumers would want more RAM to run local models but then hyperscalers capacity will be unused.

Or, we could be fucked.

WallstreeetBets has been disturbingly accurate in its predictions - basically anything related to AI.

Dram is just extremely specialised.

However, that the hyperscalers and AI companies aren't doing this says a lot about their true beliefs about how much future demand AI will have.

AI companies claim they will need a ton of massive expansion, but are unwilling to take on the risk of the capital needed for that expansion.

I'm hearing a lot of sad whining from AI folks about how these chip makers are holding them back, but who actually has the money to finance the expansion easily? Chip makers have been through this game far longer, when Sam Altman went around claiming it was time for $7T of fabs the AI companies made it clear that they were willing to make ridiculous claims, eliminating credibility.

What's needed now is for them to funnel a tiny amount of their massive piles of cash into financing fabs directly.

Just look at how Intel has struggled to compete in recent years, and they have been in the business for decades.

Also had to do an Intel build, and there was no way we were going cudimm at current prices. =3

As for 20-25% growth not being enough, I think it's not that far off, if we assume data center build out plans hit a wall and slow down significantly, and the AI heat starts to cool off.

I don't think 20-25% may be enough in the short term but if the AI build out stops within this year, we have a massive oversupply instead of a under supply.

What if its in everyone's interest to buy computers at say 1/3rd the rate and switch everything over to HBM?

the discrepancy between compute and memory has been growing for ages, perhaps a painful switch to HBM is exactly what we need?

Would you rather have 3 intermediate computers with low memory bandwidth, or wait a little longer statistically so that we can all enjoy a new computer at 1/3rd the rate but much higher bandwidth than the area ratio?

I don't actually know what the rate of growth before October was, I'm sure someone round here will though.

The entire sector is now facing a critical RAM starvation crisis where memory manufacturers are actively slow-rolling supply just to keep prices high and avoid running out entirely.

This has created an unprecedented supply-and-demand distortion where desperate companies are getting rejected even at a 5x markup, and mission-critical SKUs are skyrocketing to 10x and 20x their baseline value.

It is a macroeconomic squeeze at a staggering scale, and the massive venture scale opportunity lies in capturing the value created by this memory gatekeeper.

From the perspective of an armchair economist, the winners will be the investors who invest in RAM wisely. The losers will likely be cash strapped SAAS companies. They’re almost completely dependent on a fleet of servers in the hyperscalers, and they’re leasing those servers and services. That leaves small SAAS companies exposed to incoming inflation in the cost of hosting.

https://davidoks.blog/p/ai-is-killing-the-cheap-smartphone

Maybe long-term purchase agreements from big buyers might have helped convince them it's okay to build, but apparently it didn't happen.

The RTX 5090 is faster than an H200. It just has less ram (32 vs 141), doesn't have NVLink, and technically isn't allowed to be used in a datacenter.

The datacenter GPUs sell at an 80% margin. They're incredibly overpriced. But the laws of supply and demand are undefeated and so here we all are.

The difficult question is more whether foreseeable memory demand will remain at the current level, grow even further, or shrink again.

Really?

How long do we have to wait until that ... cost reduction hits us?