Memory Prices Surge Up to 90% From Q4 2025

[Daniel Nenni]

• 
• Memory prices have soared 80%-90% in Q1 2026 so far compared to Q4 2025, with DRAM, NAND and HBM all hitting record-breaking highs.
• To mitigate cost pressures, OEMs are reducing memory content per device or prioritizing premium lineups equipped with LPDDR5, where price pressure is relatively manageable.
• 
  
• Conventional DRAM margins surpassed HBM in Q4 2025, while manufacturer operating margins are expected to hit historic peaks with record-breaking earnings in Q1 2026.

Seoul, Beijing, Berlin, Buenos Aires, Fort Collins, Hong Kong, London, New Delhi, Taipei, Tokyo – Feb 5, 2026

Memory prices have risen by 80%-90% QoQ in Q1 2026 so far, according to the February issue of Counterpoint’s Memory Price Tracker, marking an unprecedented and record-breaking surge. The primary driver of this rise is the sharp price increase in general-purpose server DRAM. Furthermore, NAND, which was relatively quiet in Q4, is also seeing a parallel jump of 80%-90% in the first quarter. Combined with the rising prices of some HBM3e products, the market is witnessing a full-throttle upward trend across all segments.

In server-grade memory, for instance, the price of 64GB RDIMM has surged from a fixed contract price of $450 in the fourth quarter to over $900 in the first quarter, and it appears likely to surpass the $1,000 mark in the second quarter.

Senior Analyst Jeongku Choi emphasized, “For device manufacturers, this is a double whammy – rising component costs and weakened consumer purchasing power will likely slow the demand as the quarter progresses. This calls for OEMs to change procurement patterns or focus on premium models to justify the higher price by delivering more value to consumers.”

Smartphone manufacturers are reducing the DRAM content or substituting TLC SSDs with more cost-effective QLC alternatives. Simultaneously, there is a clear trend of declining orders for LPDDR4, which is currently in short supply, and increasing orders for LPDDR5, supported by the rollout of new entry-level chipsets that are compatible with the latest DRAM standard.

Choi further noted, “The memory profitability is expected to reach unprecedented levels. DRAM operating margins have already reached the 60% range in Q4 2025, marking the first time margins for general-purpose DRAM have surpassed those of HBM. The first quarter of 2026 is set to be the period where DRAM margins exceed their historical peaks for the first time. Having said that, this will either set a new normal or a very high bar which looks solid now but could make the next down cycle (if there is one) look uglier.”

Memory Price Tracker, Feb 2026: 90% Jump from Q4 2025

Overview:Q1 2026 is experiencing a violent price rally, with DRAM surging 80%-90% QoQ so far. NAND has also turned bullish, rising in tandem with DRAM and HBM. Suppliers are delaying contract talks until after the Lunar New Year to leverage higher post-holiday pricing. With no signs of abating...

counterpointresearch.com

 

[Xebec]

The chart above actually shows the *best* case price increase (from a consumer viewpoint) on the PC side. A DDR4 DIMM that is 8GB in size -- is a configuration in relative low demand.

From what I've been reading -- Retail DDR4 prices overall are up about 2X from their lows in 1H 2025, while PC DDR5 prices are up more like 4X (300%). The top end DDR5 kits (64GB per DIMM) are often 5-6X above their lows.

 

[MKWVentures]

The chart above actually shows the *best* case price increase (from a consumer viewpoint) on the PC side. A DDR4 DIMM that is 8GB in size -- is a configuration in relative low demand.

From what I've been reading -- Retail DDR4 prices overall are up about 2X from their lows in 1H 2025, while PC DDR5 prices are up more like 4X (300%). The top end DDR5 kits (64GB per DIMM) are often 5-6X above their lows.

So we already know how much prices went up in Q4 for ASP. This is the price memory companies received in Q4. DRAM increased 30% including DDR4, DDR5, HBM (NAND showed similar price increase)

Are these numbers for actual sales price received by memory companies in Q1 or are they for quotes issued in Q1 for the future? Do you think memory ASP prices reported in Q1 earnings will be 90% higher than Q4 2025?

Couple issues we are seeing:
1) Memory output, bits will increase about 20-25% in 2026. it doesnt matter what people want, that is going to be the number. So saying demand or builds is skyrocketing is not useful. Demand could increase 100% or 200% and it doesnt matter.
2) The price that some people (not all) are willing to pay is skyrocketing. But everyone will still be short to what they want.
3) People getting cut off in multiple markets. Many people will not get memory they need at any price. They will flatten or lower shipments of modules.
4) As a result spot price is also fairly meaningless (no volume at that spot price).

The Key is: What is the impact when certain companies do not get memory and therefore lower overall builds (Qualcomm presented first warning).

What will the "new equilibrium" bring? PCs and phones flatten or lower memory content? Or sell less PCs and Phones? Hyperscalers have tons of money. PC OEMS, Phone OEMs do not.

 

[KevinK]

Named companies with reported prepayments/forward deals
• Nvidia – HBM prepayments - Nvidia has been described as placing large prepayments with Micron and SK hynix to secure future HBM output, shifting supplier payment cycles in its favor and squeezing smartphone OEMs and others. Industry coverage also notes that SK hynix booked nearly all of its 2026 HBM wafer output by mid‑2025, with Nvidia as the key anchor customer, implying multi‑year capacity commitments rather than spot buys.
• OpenAI – very large DRAM wafer contracts - In late 2025, OpenAI signed deals with Samsung and SK hynix to purchase up to 900,000 DRAM wafers per month, roughly 40% of global DRAM output, for its “Stargate” initiative. These were structured as long‑term wafer‑level procurement contracts—effectively taking capacity off the open market and functioning as massive pre‑buys of future DRAM production.
• Hyperscalers and other cloud/AI players (less specific). Industry analyses describe “hyperscalers and smartphone OEMs” (Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Meta, ByteDance, Apple, etc.) signing multi‑year supply and capacity agreements that “lock in significant slices of DRAM and NAND output,” with memory makers prioritizing customers willing to commit to long‑term volume.

Reports on the HBM market note that SK hynix, Samsung, and Micron have all delivered HBM4 samples to major customers and are negotiating multi‑year supply contracts for 12‑Hi and 16‑Hi HBM4 targeted at Nvidia and other AI chip vendors.

What’s known versus inferred
• Public sources directly name Nvidia (HBM prepayments), OpenAI (huge DRAM wafer commitments), and “hyperscalers/smartphone OEMs” in aggregate, but do not always disclose individual contract terms for Amazon, Microsoft, Google, Meta, etc.
• Memory makers themselves (SK hynix, Samsung, Micron) describe their HBM production for 2024–2026 as “sold out” or largely allocated, implying forward contracts and/or prepayments with their largest AI and cloud customers, even when the buyers aren’t named.

 

[Xebec]

Couple issues we are seeing:
1) Memory output, bits will increase about 20-25% in 2026. it doesnt matter what people want, that is going to be the number. So saying demand or builds is skyrocketing is not useful. Demand could increase 100% or 200% and it doesnt matter.
2) The price that some people (not all) are willing to pay is skyrocketing. But everyone will still be short to what they want.
3) People getting cut off in multiple markets. Many people will not get memory they need at any price. They will flatten or lower shipments of modules.
4) As a result spot price is also fairly meaningless (no volume at that spot price).

The Key is: What is the impact when certain companies do not get memory and therefore lower overall builds (Qualcomm presented first warning).

What will the "new equilibrium" bring? PCs and phones flatten or lower memory content? Or sell less PCs and Phones? Hyperscalers have tons of money. PC OEMS, Phone OEMs do not.

Great synopsis and questions. I can't see PC, Phones, and (price sensitive) edge devices continuing in the volumes they've been doing, a PC-recession is coming.

Also - if/when a bubble pops, what's the reverse reaction at that point - Who could be positioned to take advantage of this?

 

[MKWVentures]

What do we think the QoQ Change in reported DRAM ASP will be in CQ1 2026? Micron will report first through February.

40%
60%
90%
More

 

[hist78]

The Key is: What is the impact when certain companies do not get memory and therefore lower overall builds (Qualcomm presented first warning).

What will the "new equilibrium" bring? PCs and phones flatten or lower memory content? Or sell less PCs and Phones? Hyperscalers have tons of money. PC OEMS, Phone OEMs do not.

Yes, the memory supply–demand imbalance is pushing memory prices much higher, and as a result it may drive smartphone prices up and reduce consumer demand. But there are more factors to consider for the impacts on Qualcomm:

1. 1. Smartphone makers, not Qualcomm or MediaTek, buy memory to build phones. Samsung’s smartphone division, Qualcomm #1 customer, uses a large number of Qualcomm and MediaTek chips, in addition to its own Exynos, across different product lines. By some estimates, Qualcomm chips power 100% of the Galaxy S25 lineup and possibly around 75% of the upcoming S26 models. It’s unrealistic to think Samsung’s memory division wouldn’t allocate enough memory to Samsung’s smartphone division to capture more revenue, profit, and market share.
2. 
   
3. 2. Qualcomm’s other major customers, Xiaomi, OPPO, Vivo, Honor, and OnePlus, are all based in mainland China. They can use Samsung and SK Hynix memory produced in China and/or source more from domestic Chinese memory suppliers. Costs will be higher due to market conditions, but it won’t be catastrophic. It would be political suicide for Samsung and SK Hynix if Chinese phone makers couldn’t secure enough memory from their China fabs.
   
   It’s still difficult to determine how much negative impact this memory price surge will ultimately have on Qualcomm.

 

[MKWVentures]

Yes, the memory supply–demand imbalance is pushing memory prices much higher, and as a result it may drive smartphone prices up and reduce consumer demand. But there are more factors to consider for the impacts on Qualcomm:

1. 1. Smartphone makers, not Qualcomm or MediaTek, buy memory to build phones. Samsung’s smartphone division, Qualcomm #1 customer, uses a large number of Qualcomm and MediaTek chips, in addition to its own Exynos, across different product lines. By some estimates, Qualcomm chips power 100% of the Galaxy S25 lineup and possibly around 75% of the upcoming S26 models. It’s unrealistic to think Samsung’s memory division wouldn’t allocate enough memory to Samsung’s smartphone division to capture more revenue, profit, and market share.

Samsung has a interesting business model. They bought Micron Memory when there was no shortage. And even if divisions partnered well (they dont), It would not be in Samsungs best interest to sell memory at lower price and turn away Server companies.

Similar to Microns Crucial cancellation. It is financially irresponsible to support crucial.

1. 
   
2. 2. Qualcomm’s other major customers, Xiaomi, OPPO, Vivo, Honor, and OnePlus, are all based in mainland China. They can use Samsung and SK Hynix memory produced in China and/or source more from domestic Chinese memory suppliers. Costs will be higher due to market conditions, but it won’t be catastrophic. It would be political suicide for Samsung and SK Hynix if Chinese phone makers couldn’t secure enough memory from their China fabs.
   
   It’s still difficult to determine how much negative impact this memory price surge will ultimately have on Qualcomm.

I think this environment will cause Chinese Market (memory and phones) to take off. also Tier 2 memory companies.

It is hard to predict how this will all settle out. But if the price more than doubles, and PC and Cell phone market are put on allocation (they are)..... the markets will be dramatically different until the bubble pops.

 

[KevinK]

I think this environment will cause Chinese Market (memory and phones) to take off. also Tier 2 memory companies.

Maybe long term. But in SMICs earning call, they see a current brewing crisis where memory prices choke-off low end consumer products, including smartphones, leading to less demand for their more mature nodes. Plus added Capex to respond, plus mistiming of equipment deliveries are likely ho cause a big hit to their profits, due to a big bump in depreciation without a commensurate short-term increase in revenue.

SMIC CEO Says Industry ‘Panicked’ About Memory Supply Shortage
More supply could come to market in nine months, executive says​

https://www.wsj.com/tech/smic-ceo-says-industry-panicked-about-memory-supply-shortage-f0e1aaed

 

[hist78]

And even if divisions partnered well (they dont), It would not be in Samsungs best interest to sell memory at lower price and turn away Server companies.

Samsung Electronics (005930.KS) has only one stock symbol, and Samsung Semiconductor and Samsung’s smartphone division are simply operating units within the same company. Like any corporation, their ultimate goal is to maximize total revenue and profit for Samsung Electronics as a whole.

When the smartphone division needs memory, it can pay whatever the market price demands and pass the cost on to consumers (which is very feasible during a global memory shortage). In many cases, this actually increases total revenue and profit for Samsung Electronics.

Consider a simple example. Suppose both an external customer (let’s call it XYZ) and Samsung’s smartphone division want to buy the same memory product. The manufacturing cost is $100 per unit, and the market price is $200. That gives Samsung Semiconductor a 50% gross margin. Let’s also assume Samsung’s smartphone division aims to maintain a 50% gross margin on its devices.

• 1. If the memory is sold to XYZ, Samsung Electronics earns a total gross profit of $100 ($200 – $100).
• 
  
• 2. If the same memory is “sold” internally at market price ($200) to Samsung’s smartphone division, Samsung Electronics earns a total gross profit of $300 (($200 × 2) – $100).

That’s $100 vs. $300 in gross profit. No CEO or board of directors would ignore that reality. We can adjust the numbers or margins to simulate different scenarios, but the direction doesn’t change. This is why it’s unrealistic to think Samsung’s smartphone division wouldn’t get the memory it needs from Samsung Semiconductor. The internal allocation simply generates more profit for the entire Samsung Electronics enterprise. Samsung’s external customers are important, but so is Samsung’s own smartphone division.

 

[lispwright]

But DRAM is in competition with HBM for raw wafer capacity, and I've been reading HBM takes 3 times as much, I assume due to downstream packaging yield challenges.

It was reported here that Samsung managed to get their act together for HBM4 qualification for Nvidia, with production to start this month. If packaging capacity, what I also hear is the general industry bottleneck, is high enough, and HBM is sufficiently more profitable, it would have to make some hard decisions.

Like any corporation, their ultimate goal is to maximize total revenue and profit for Samsung Electronics as a whole.

That's a theory, we know from hard experience decisions in a company as big as it tend to be made for the benefit of individual units all the way to the decision makers themselves. HBM for the AI industry is more sexy than smartphones.

 

[hist78]

But DRAM is in competition with HBM for raw wafer capacity, and I've been reading HBM takes 3 times as much, I assume due to downstream packaging yield challenges.

It was reported here that Samsung managed to get their act together for HBM4 qualification for Nvidia, with production to start this month. If packaging capacity, what I also hear is the general industry bottleneck, is high enough, and HMB is sufficiently more profitable, it would have to make some hard decisions.

Those considerations are valid, but they are not binary yes/no issues. Capacity may be tight, but that doesn’t mean Samsung will stop supplying memory for its own smartphones. When supply is constrained, Samsung’s smartphone division will almost certainly be the last to feel the impact. External customers will take the hit first. Historically, Samsung has often used shortages, whether in displays, memory, or SoCs, as opportunities to strengthen its own affiliated products. It’s simply unrealistic to think Samsung would sacrifice the revenue, profit, and market share of its smartphone division (which accounts for 38% of Samsung’s 2025 revenue) to support external customers or even competitors.

Another important point is that the memory market has always moved in boom‑bust‑boom cycles. During the most recent downturn in 2022–2023, it was Samsung’s smartphone division that carried the company, helping offset the massive losses in Samsung Semiconductor. Other companies may not operate this way, but for Samsung, this practice is part of its corporate DNA. It’s hard to imagine Samsung behaving any differently this time.

 

[MKWVentures]

Those considerations are valid, but they are not binary yes/no issues. Capacity may be tight, but that doesn’t mean Samsung will stop supplying memory for its own smartphones. When supply is constrained, Samsung’s smartphone division will almost certainly be the last to feel the impact. External customers will take the hit first. Historically, Samsung has often used shortages, whether in displays, memory, or SoCs, as opportunities to strengthen its own affiliated products. It’s simply unrealistic to think Samsung would sacrifice the revenue, profit, and market share of its smartphone division (which accounts for 38% of Samsung’s 2025 revenue) to support external customers or even competitors.

Another important point is that the memory market has always moved in boom‑bust‑boom cycles. During the most recent downturn in 2022–2023, it was Samsung’s smartphone division that carried the company, helping offset the massive losses in Samsung Semiconductor. Other companies may not operate this way, but for Samsung, this practice is part of its corporate DNA. It’s hard to imagine Samsung behaving any differently this time.

I am just saying I have multiple examples of Samsung buying from competitors to some of their divisions. The Division head do not work and play well together. It actually is a kinda positive part of their DNA.