[HN Gopher] Global Memory Shortage Crisis: Market Analysis
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Global Memory Shortage Crisis: Market Analysis
        
       Author : naves
       Score  : 70 points
       Date   : 2025-12-28 15:51 UTC (7 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.idc.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.idc.com)
        
       | transcriptase wrote:
       | All so people in developing countries can churn out boomer-
       | baiting slop for social media engagement farming and ad views.
        
         | crazydoggers wrote:
         | What makes you think it's limited to boomers.. know of just as
         | many millennials that eat the stuff up too.
        
           | willis936 wrote:
           | As a millenial all I see is my generation being repulsed by
           | AI slop. Boomers and zoomers though have a large presence of
           | consumption. It was easy to see this with your own family
           | over the holidays.
        
             | crazydoggers wrote:
             | I think your sample of Millenials is probably more well
             | informed.
        
               | bongodongobob wrote:
               | Nah, it's fueled by huge misinformation campaigns. It's
               | going to kill art, put us all out of the job, uses 1.5
               | million gallons per query, pollutes water, will kill the
               | electric grid, etc. These seem to be the most popular
               | uninformed lines of thinking.
        
               | ssl-3 wrote:
               | We have always been at war with Eastasia.
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | Ya we seem to live in the the place where the firehose of
               | falsehood is filling the lake of bullshit asymmetry. The
               | problem with this is uninformed lines of thinking
               | eventually lead to policy.
        
               | Forgeties79 wrote:
               | I agree several of the commonly repeated critiques are
               | really poor in quality and can be emotionally
               | driven/simply parroted TikTok nonsense, but at the other
               | end of the spectrum we have AI evangelists who get
               | surprisingly aggressive if you say anything remotely
               | negative about GenAI or suggest maybe we should be having
               | a discussion about the ethical ramifications of these
               | tools. Particularly how they are trained and deployed and
               | who should be guiding that process.
               | 
               | I find it very odd when people proudly proclaim they
               | used, say, Grok to answer a question. Their identity is
               | so tied up in it that if you start talking about the
               | quality of the information they get incredibly defensive.
               | In contrast: I have never felt protective of my Google
               | search results, which is basically the same thing given
               | how most people use these tools currently.
               | 
               | It's kind of wild how hostile some people get if you
               | attempt to open the discussion up at all.
        
             | kubb wrote:
             | We musn't be unkind to the boomers. When we're their age,
             | the methods for assaulting our poor old brains will be ever
             | so more sophisticated.
        
               | willis936 wrote:
               | I'm not blaming them. It's really frustrating that old
               | people are taken advantage of. We shouldn't need to be so
               | cynical. This isn't the star trek future we were
               | promised.
               | 
               | Edit: It's similarly frustrating about the zoomers.
               | Parents are derelict of duty by not defending their kids
               | and preparing them for the world they are in.
        
               | rkomorn wrote:
               | > This isn't the star trek future we were promised.
               | 
               | It is, though. We're just in the part leading up to
               | WWIII.
        
               | natebc wrote:
               | Yeah, that bit of the Star Trek Universe is something not
               | many folks know about.
               | 
               | You want to be born into the utopia, not before.
        
               | kubb wrote:
               | Sci-fi will never materialize. But the ones passionate
               | about it are so desperate for the faux future that they
               | won't be able to tell when they're being duped.
               | 
               | Just wait until the next great collapse, a disaster big
               | enough to force change. Hopefully we'll have the right
               | ideas lying around at the time to restructure our social
               | communication system.
               | 
               | Until then, it's slow decline. Embrace it.
        
               | pixl97 wrote:
               | Sci-fi has materialized, we're living in it now. The
               | problem is it's the dystopia edition.
        
             | Forgeties79 wrote:
             | https://yougov.com/en-us/articles/50754-how-different-
             | genera...
        
               | willis936 wrote:
               | What do ads have to do with AI slop?
        
               | Forgeties79 wrote:
               | "All so people in developing countries can churn out
               | boomer-baiting slop for _social media engagement farming
               | and ad views_."
               | 
               | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46413716
        
             | tempest_ wrote:
             | They will tell you they are repulsed by it if asked but its
             | a toss up if they can identify it. Look at any thread on
             | Reddit/IG/Tiktok whatever and I personally would guess I
             | could manage to identify AI output 20% of the time.
             | 
             | Boomers might be out there consuming those AI youtube
             | videos that are just tiktok voice over with a generated
             | slide show but Millennials think since they can identify
             | this as slop that they are not affected. That is incorrect,
             | and just as bad.
        
       | kristianp wrote:
       | > potential contraction in the global smartphone market alongside
       | an increase in average selling prices (ASP). In 2026, in our
       | moderate downside scenario, we could see the market contract by
       | 2.9%. In our pessimistic downside scenario, it could be as bad as
       | 5.2%.
       | 
       | > PC market contract by 4.9% compared with a 2.4% year-on-year
       | decline in the November forecast. Under a more pessimistic
       | scenario, the decline could deepen to 8.9%.
        
       | RyanShook wrote:
       | I see this as a competitive opportunity for Apple. If Apple
       | smartphone specs improve while Androids stagnate it could create
       | more iOS users.
       | 
       | The promised AI metaverse is still a long way off and in the
       | meantime people still want the best smartphone.
        
         | layer8 wrote:
         | Most regular people don't care about RAM specs. And lately it's
         | Apple that has been rather stagnating in terms of features.
        
           | neutronicus wrote:
           | I would love stagnation, the keyboard has always been a
           | dumpster fire but these days it is an actively regressing
           | dumpster fire
        
           | rockskon wrote:
           | What, because they aren't shoving an LLM in every orifice of
           | their product?
        
         | memoriuaysj wrote:
         | I have no idea how much RAM my phone has.
         | 
         | And if you think that somebody buys an iPhone because they
         | compare the specs with Android :)))))
        
           | Maxion wrote:
           | Basically if I have to start comparing iPhone specs to
           | Android phone specs I might aswell just buy an Android. The
           | point of iOS is that you don't have to.
        
           | arcbyte wrote:
           | I agree with you and have agreed with you for a long time.
           | However, I definitely see the writing on the wall. More than
           | one person in my circle have traditionally been Android users
           | and the lack of innovation from both Apple and Android have
           | them comparing devices on specs MUCH more. I include myself
           | in this list on my next upgrade. I'll be looking largely at
           | specs on the next upgrad because honestly there's not much
           | day to day difference in usage between apple and android
           | anymore
        
           | oezi wrote:
           | The competitive advantage comes from Apple having the supply
           | chain contracts in place to not be affected by the 2026 price
           | hike as much. The Android phones will be more expensive and
           | thus will capture less market share.
        
             | memoriuaysj wrote:
             | iPhone being expensive is a feature.
             | 
             | "What do you mean my status flagship iPhone costs only half
             | as much as a flagship Android???"
        
         | root_axis wrote:
         | > _if Apple smartphone specs improve while Androids stagnate it
         | could create more iOS user_
         | 
         | Nah. The marginal utility of more smartphone ram is near zero
         | at this point. The vast majority of people wouldn't even notice
         | if the memory in their phone tripled overnight.
        
         | kllrnohj wrote:
         | How is it an opportunity for Apple? They are a customer of
         | Samsung and Micron RAM modules just like everyone else is. They
         | aren't in any unique position other than their user base is
         | already used to paying extreme markup for RAM. Now whether
         | Apple just eats the cost in their profit margin or charges
         | _even more_ for RAM remains to be seen.
        
           | krackers wrote:
           | Their supply chain prowess likely means they have already
           | secured contracts for 2026 (and maybe even 2027), so they
           | will not be affected by the price hike. But maybe they'll
           | still use it as an opportunity to bump prices and rake in
           | free profit, who knows.
        
             | walterbell wrote:
             | Apple reportedly negotiated a 50% price increase in memory
             | supply for 2026, down from a higher price given to other
             | OEMs.
        
       | kelseyfrog wrote:
       | I welcome this. Anything that makes consumer electronics more
       | expensive acts counter to the Baumol Effect.
       | 
       | How scarce does memory have to get before it makes health care
       | half as expensive?
        
         | Avicebron wrote:
         | Where do you think the IT costs for doctor's workstations are
         | going to be redirected?
        
           | kelseyfrog wrote:
           | I always thought it was more about differences in
           | productivity between sectors. If the Baumol effect made
           | service sector wages increase, would wouldn't ineffencies do
           | the inverse?
        
         | bongodongobob wrote:
         | It makes _all_ electronics more expensive. This makes every
         | service more expensive as well.
        
           | kelseyfrog wrote:
           | It sounds like effenciencies in manufacturing sectors lead to
           | more costly medical services, _and_ ineffencies in
           | manufacturing sectors lead to costly medical services. Am I
           | understanding correctly?
        
             | krupan wrote:
             | Who said efficiencies in manufacturing sectors lead to more
             | costly medical services?
        
               | kelseyfrog wrote:
               | William J. Baumol the namesake of the Baumol Effect[1].
               | Generally it is
               | 
               | > the tendency for wages in jobs that have experienced
               | little or no increase in labor productivity to rise in
               | response to rising wages in other jobs that did
               | experience high productivity growth
               | 
               | Specifically, manufacturing sectors have increased
               | productivity and service sectors haven't.
               | 
               | 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baumol_effect
        
       | TrackerFF wrote:
       | Imagine a future where a resourceful computer will be unobtanium,
       | because AI companies decided to outbid consumers. Your PC will be
       | _just_ powerful enough to work as a terminal, with all the heavy
       | lifting done by cloud compute data centers.
       | 
       | Every functionality be will subscription-based. You'll own
       | nothing and you'll be happy.
        
         | pixl97 wrote:
         | I mean this is one of the risk factors in AI safety that's been
         | communicated for a long time. It's not just computing, but
         | potentially everything. Energy resources, land resources (like
         | those used to grow food for us meat bags), transportation
         | resources. Suddenly humans find themselves outbid by AI as AI
         | has pushed us out of the economy.
         | 
         | The economy says nothing about requiring humans to exist.
        
         | nialse wrote:
         | That is the logical conclusion. The era of personal computers
         | is coming to an end. It had a good run though.
        
           | Forgeties79 wrote:
           | Luckily Beelinks are still cheap, work decently, and can run
           | Linux/Windows, so if all someone needs is to browse the
           | Internet and do basic stuff, honestly? They're fine. We'll
           | see how long that lasts though.
        
         | antonkochubey wrote:
         | "Heavy lifting" here being running 108 MB of JavaScript to
         | render shopping cart of an online store, correct?
         | 
         | Or consuming 2 GB of RAM to have Teams running in the
         | background doing nothing?
         | 
         | Yeah, if we got rid of that as a result of RAM shortages,
         | that'd be great.
        
         | tom_ wrote:
         | I'm struggling to picture how we get there from here? There's a
         | huge pile of second hand PCs available, and almost all of them
         | are massively more powerful than necessary for terminal
         | purposes only.
        
       | IAmGraydon wrote:
       | Article completely misses the true cause of the price increase -
       | Sam Altman/OAI made a deal with Samsung and SK Hynix get 40% of
       | their RAM wafer production for the 2026 period. This was economic
       | warfare against OpenAI's competitors, and the competitors along
       | with the data centers responded by buying up every bit of DDR5 in
       | sight. This price increase was engineered.
       | 
       | The deal was inked on October 1, 2025, and rumors of it started
       | swirling in September. Take a look at the RAM price charts.
       | Anyone who attributes this just to "AI growth" has no idea what
       | they're talking about. AI has been growing rapidly for three
       | years and yet this price increase just happened exactly when
       | Altman signed this deal.
       | 
       | https://pcpartpicker.com/trends/price/memory/
       | 
       | It's also worth noting that IDC, who published this report, is
       | wholly owned by Blackstone, who is also heavily invested in
       | OpenAI. It would be prudent to be cautious about who you believe.
        
         | aunty_helen wrote:
         | After the dns entry, the stockpile of ram may be the most
         | valuable asset that company has.
        
         | anon373839 wrote:
         | Right! Raw wafers, not even memory. I have seen no evidence
         | that this move was anything but a means of taking product out
         | of the global supply chain.
        
           | IAmGraydon wrote:
           | That's correct and a good point I almost forgot about - they
           | can't even utilize what they bought!
        
             | kubb wrote:
             | It feels like abuse. They shouldn't be able to get away
             | with such trickery.
        
               | GoatInGrey wrote:
               | With a functional government, antitrust enforcement would
               | prevent a single company from driving economy-wide price
               | inflation out of an attempt to starve its competition.
               | Since we don't have a functional government, we'll
               | ungracefully take this up the ass.
        
             | ThrowawayR2 wrote:
             | You do know that they can hire semiconductor packaging
             | companies to put together memory modules the same way they
             | bought the DRAM wafers, right?
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | Doesn't Apple routinely do the same thing? Reserve chip
         | production for the leading-edge nodes, and sometimes enter into
         | similar deals for other tech such as displays? I'm not seeing
         | any evidence that this was intentional "warfare" on OpenAI's
         | part: they're just making a high-stakes bet that they can
         | ultimately find a better and higher-margin use for that raw
         | DRAM than HNers' gaming battlestations, or whatever the next-
         | best use was when they made that deal.
        
           | duped wrote:
           | No, apple does not buy production capacity to prevent others
           | from using it. They buy it to use it themselves.
           | 
           | The wafers are not DRAM. This is more likely burning oil
           | wells so your enemy can't use them. Wafers are to chips what
           | steel blanks are to engines. You basically need clean rooms
           | just to accept delivery and entire fabs to do anything.
           | Someone who doesn't own a fab buying the wafers is
           | essentially buying them to destroy them.
        
         | cedws wrote:
         | Not sure that OpenAI's move was a very good one, they've just
         | created a lot of enemies for themselves. I see comments all
         | over the internet about AI slop making RAM expensive. It's
         | going to eat into the profits of a lot of companies. People
         | will be willing for this insanity to end.
        
           | krupan wrote:
           | We can only hope you are right
        
         | krupan wrote:
         | I hadn't heard of this, so I searched the web (without any help
         | from an LLM, btw) and found this:
         | 
         | https://www.mooreslawisdead.com/post/sam-altman-s-dirty-dram...
        
       | hinkley wrote:
       | One of the things I've been hoping for every time a new EC2
       | instance comes out is for them to unpin the memory:core ratio a
       | bit. I don't expect they have enough r# and c# users to
       | completely balance things out so what they're really doing is
       | selling people more CPUs to get the memory they need.
       | 
       | It would be nice if it were creeping up generation to generation.
       | But if this keeps up I fear the opposite.
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | The best way of "unpinning" those ratios for many ephemeral
         | workloads is to use Lambda/FaaS, not EC2.
        
           | hinkley wrote:
           | kv stores also exist because for many generations of tooling
           | it was faster to manage read-mostly data off-heap instead of
           | on, and that becomes more true the more processes you run
           | doing jobs that touch the same data.
        
         | jeffbee wrote:
         | You should just get used to it because the memory per core is
         | going down inexorably forever until someone makes a physics
         | breakthrough. We know how to print cores and the core count is
         | going to keep going up.
        
       | Youden wrote:
       | "However, this is not just a cyclical shortage driven by a
       | mismatch in supply and demand, but a potentially permanent,
       | strategic reallocation of the world's silicon wafer capacity.
       | [...] This is a zero-sum game: every wafer allocated to an HBM
       | stack for an Nvidia GPU is a wafer denied to the LPDDR5X module
       | of a mid-range smartphone or the SSD of a consumer laptop."
       | 
       | I wonder if this will result in writing more memory-efficient
       | software? The trend for the last couple of decades has been that
       | nearly all consumer software outside of gaming has moved to
       | browsers or browser-based runtimes like Electron. There's been a
       | vicious cycle of heavier software -> more RAM -> heavier software
       | but if this RAM shortage is permanent, the cycle can't continue.
       | 
       | Apple and Google seemed to be working on local AI models as well.
       | Will they have to scale that back due to lack of RAM on the
       | devices? Or perhaps they think users will pay the premium for
       | more RAM if it means they get AI?
       | 
       | Or is this all a temporary problem due to OpenAI's buying
       | something like 40% of the wafers?
        
         | zozbot234 wrote:
         | There's plenty of scope for local AI models to become more
         | efficient, too. MoE doesn't need too much RAM: only the
         | parameters for experts that are active at any given time truly
         | need to be in memory, the rest can be in read-only storage and
         | be fetched on demand. If you're doing CPU inference this can
         | even be managed automatically by mmap, whereas loading params
         | into VRAM must currently be managed as part of running an
         | inference step. (This is where GPU drivers/shader
         | languages/programming models could also see some improvement,
         | TBH)
        
           | dummydummy1234 wrote:
           | But aren't the experts chosen on a token by token basis,
           | which means bandwidth limitations?
        
         | antisthenes wrote:
         | > There's been a vicious cycle of heavier software -> more RAM
         | -> heavier software but if this RAM shortage is permanent, the
         | cycle can't continue.
         | 
         | What do you mean it can't continue? You'll just have to deal
         | with worse performance is all.
         | 
         | Revolutionary consumer-side performance gains like multi-core
         | CPUs and switching to SSDs will be a thing of distant past.
         | Enjoy your 2 second animations, peasant.
        
         | duped wrote:
         | It's not a zero sum game because silicon wafers are not a
         | finite resource. Industry can and will produce more.
        
           | hackable_sand wrote:
           | Neither are paperclips.
        
           | tokioyoyo wrote:
           | If industry has a bit of fear that the demand will slow down
           | by the time they can output meaningful amount of chips, then
           | probably not. Time will show.
        
         | treebeard901 wrote:
         | Code the AI will produce will solve the memory usage problems
         | which is itself a result of lazy or poor human coders.
        
           | xocnad wrote:
           | Nice assertion. Perhaps you meant that AI could be directed
           | towards less memory intensive implementations. That would
           | still have to be directed by those same lazy/poor coders
           | because the code the AI is learning from is their bad code
           | (for the most part).
        
           | to11mtm wrote:
           | IDK, given the prevalence of Electron and other technically-
           | correct-but-inefficient code out there, at bare minimum it
           | would require decent prompting to help.
        
         | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
         | > I wonder if this will result in writing more memory-efficient
         | software?
         | 
         | If the consumer market can't get cheap RAM anymore, the natural
         | result is a pivot back to server-heavy technology (where all
         | the RAM is anyway) with things like server-side rendering and
         | thin clients. Developers are far too lazy to suddenly become
         | efficient programmers and there's plenty of network bandwidth.
        
         | krupan wrote:
         | This is a temporary problem driven by the AI bubble. It's going
         | to hurt until the bubble pops, but when that happens other
         | things are going to hurt
        
       | 0xbadcafebee wrote:
       | I don't really get the panic. This is the same as the pandemic,
       | just for different reasons. A change in demand is causing supply
       | shortages and price hikes. But the demand will eventually swing
       | back as the current demand is completely unsustainable. AI demand
       | will crumble, prices will bottom out, and companies who bet big
       | on AI & RAM will end up going into big layoffs triggering another
       | recession and a huge market crash. We literally just went through
       | all this, it can't be a surprise.
        
         | GoatInGrey wrote:
         | On the AI correction point: given the K-shaped economy, we're
         | headed for a mean reversion either way. Either the bottom
         | corrects upward or the top corrects down. Real life being what
         | it is, I'm bracing for the latter. Though I'd love to be proven
         | wrong
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-12-28 23:01 UTC)