I had a i7-2600, but the motherboard failed and so was thrown away.

As far as the current RAM shortage and whopping price increases, I smell a cartel in action. The price increase conflicts with Microsoft's desire for everyone to purchase new computers so to be able to run Windows 11, so who knows where that will go. Does everyone pay the extortionate prices, or does Windows 11 get rejected in favour of something else?

It is said that the problems are caused by new AI facilities, but most of that hasn't even been built yet. So why is it happening now?

My daily use "modern rig" is still i7-4790k, gtx980ti, 32gb ddr3. It does all I need really. Will wait out this mess.

Robbbert wrote on 2025-12-23, 03:27:

As far as the current RAM shortage and whopping price increases, I smell a cartel in action. The price increase conflicts with Microsoft's desire for everyone to purchase new computers so to be able to run Windows 11, so who knows where that will go. Does everyone pay the extortionate prices, or does Windows 11 get rejected in favour of something else?

All of these RAM manufacturers have already been found guilty of forming a price fixing cartel in the early '00s, they had to pay fines except for Micron (lol) that got away because they "cooperated" during the investigation. So it's nothing new.

Robbbert wrote on 2025-12-23, 03:27:

It is said that the problems are caused by new AI facilities, but most of that hasn't even been built yet. So why is it happening now?

The word is that OpenAI got ahold of the unprocessed RAM silicon wafers, so they don't intend to use it right away. Apparently Altman held negotiations in secret with both Samsung and SK Hynix at the same time but neither of these 2 manufacturers knew about the other dealing with OpenAI until it was signed. OpenAI is probably doing this to deprive their competition of DRAM chips, and the consumer market seems to be collateral damage... but who knows, I wouldn't be surprised if they also used it as an opportunity to exert some feudal control over the masses, which they seem to really enjoy doing.

Robbbert wrote on 2025-12-23, 03:27:

It is said that the problems are caused by new AI facilities, but most of that hasn't even been built yet. So why is it happening now?

Purchase contracts that AI companies are setting up with RAM suppliers. Apparently OpenAI has inked agreements to buy up a significant portion of the global memory supply.

zyzzle wrote on 2025-12-22, 22:24:

I absolutely agree. This recent tripling of prices will only hurt things. Total system RAM will remain stagnant or even decrease […]
Show full quote

Hoping wrote on 2025-12-22, 12:42:

I'm not surprised either, as the amount of RAM has been stagnant for years. Back in 2010, I installed 16GB of DDR3 for the Phenom II 1100T because it was cheap. Nowadays, 64 GB is considered a lot, but in my opinion, that's ridiculous. 64 GB should be considered the minimum today, 128 GB should be acceptable, 256 GB should be standard, and 512 GB should be for enthusiasts. The same goes for consumer SSDs, which have been pretty much stagnant at a maximum of 4 TB in general.
In these respects, hardware has been very stagnant. It is normal for such a strong software advance as AI to suffer from this stagnation. And to show a great imbalance.

I absolutely agree. This recent tripling of prices will only hurt things. Total system RAM will remain stagnant or even decrease due to this current faddish egregious cost. We should be seeing 128GB standard systems by now- as a minimum. Back in 2010, 16 gb of DDR3 was only about $50, 32gb was considered enthusiast and you could get that for a little over $100. I couldn't even speculate how much 512 GB of DDR5 RAM would cost now. Thousands?! Which motherboard will actually accept that much RAM? None?

It's this stagnation which doesn't bode well for the industry. CPUs have also stagnated, especially at Intel. Not much increase in literally 15 years. My i7 2600k still rocks very well today at 5 Ghz. Building systems is no longer cheap. With SSDs more than doubling, RAM tripling or quadrupling, and components also greatly increased, it's a cryptically expensive endeavor. The days of the $200 basic system are over. One could almost argue that AI (coporate greed) and gaming is hurting the hobbyist industry more than helping it. Is there even a hobbyist industry any longer? It's a sad state of affairs.

During the last 50 years, the trend has been toward commodization, and prices kept falling and falling for similar amounts of power in computer systems. Now, it's toward profit and rapaciousness at all costs. There is no Moore's Law any longer. Prices will just keep rising. Stagnation is very, very bad, but that'll be the trend.

I agree with most of this, but I think CPUs have improved nicely in the past 15 years since Sandy Bridge (thanks mostly to Ryzen) unless you are stuck using a 60Hz display. Considering most non-gaming tasks (as well as a lot of less intensive games) are still fine on systems that old, we just don't "need" the advancements in CPU power that we needed 25 years ago. BUT... if you are using a 120Hz or higher display and want to keep your frame rates up there, a 15 year old CPU is going to struggle compared to something newer.

I used a 2500K overclocked to 4.2Ghz for 8 years before getting my current X570 board and a Ryzen 5 3600 in 2019. The difference in a lot of situations was huge. Then going to a 5800X3D a few years later was also a large improvement in situations where the CPU was actually the bottleneck. The overclocked 2500K is still perfectly usable for day to day stuff and would probably game decently if I was just using a 60Hz screen, but there are situations that I'm sure would be quite excruciating... like trying to play a physics sandbox game like Teardown, or even something like Minecraft with some of the latest view distance mods. It takes quite a bit of processing power to keep those kinds of situations in the 120-200fps range. I don't really play AAA games, so I can't say how the latest ones handle old CPUs.

Also, memory performance has changed considerably since then too. With huge caches and significantly higher bandwidth, it can help quite a bit at times.

Overall though, things have stagnated quite a bit, yes. I think we can blame that on the fact that nearly everything the average non-gamer needs to accomplish on a computer could be done plenty fast enough on a Windows XP computer with an SSD, a couple gigs of RAM and a Core 2 Duo... if not for outdated security updates and web browser support. That has taken a lot of the urgency out of advancing the speed of general computing.

The GPU stagnation is the worst though. There is absolutely NO REASON that a 3060 Ti should trade blows with a 4060 Ti. The fact that the 4060 Ti 16GB also launched with a ~$430 MSRP is just... disgusting. At least 5000 series brought some slight improvements but the prices are still so bad it makes no sense to buy one unless you really need it for something or you currently have a (lower end) GPU that is from the RTX 2000 series or older.

Thanks to AI your old GPU goes a longer distance these days, unless you have a no AI policy in your gaming. You also stand to gain from any extent to which AI reduces the cost per unit of development.

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2025-12-23, 04:34:

There is absolutely NO REASON that a 3060 Ti should trade blows with a 4060 Ti.

That's because 4060 Ti is a low power chip for laptops that replaced 3050 from the previous generation. There's no stagnation in performance, just steady price hiking with each new generation. Although everything except 3060 12Gb and 3090 24Gb was a waste of money in the long run (not enough VRAM).

The Serpent Rider wrote on 2025-12-23, 10:38:

Ozzuneoj wrote on 2025-12-23, 04:34:

There is absolutely NO REASON that a 3060 Ti should trade blows with a 4060 Ti.

That's because 4060 Ti is a low power chip for laptops that replaced 3050 from the previous generation. There's no stagnation in performance, just steady price hiking with each new generation.

This is just arguing semantics. Every product is developed for a purpose and then given a name and a price. If nvidia repeatedly fills the lower\mid range markets with products that are either slower than or barely faster than the previous generation for the same or higher price, how is that not stagnation? They could make a card with 1/16th the die area of last year's model while having exactly the same performance (impressive!) but if they sell it for the same price, that is still performance stagnation from a consumer standpoint.

The product that was sold as a 4060 Ti should have been substantially faster than the one sold as a 3060 Ti two and a half years prior for near the same price (with the new one slightly less, accounting for inflation), instead it was sometimes slower and sometimes a little faster. That is performance stagnation. Doesn't mean they didn't have the technology to do better... they chose stagnation.

The 50 series offered a small but tangible but still mediocre uplift 4 1/2 years after the 30 series, but as you said the VRAM limitations kill the value of so many of these products. If they'd bothered releasing 10-16GB models of the 3070-3080 series those cards would be lasting even longer and making the current situation seem even more stagnant.

People are complaining about a 32 GB DDR5 module for $350 yet own a 5070 GPU and a 5950X totaling to like $1400. It's funny when tin foil hat conspiracies appear about high prices and Big Tech buying up everything to take people's rights to own stuff, usually written by people who have enough disposable income to buy a 32 GB module every month. It's basically the same topic as "retro prices have gone up" written by people owning a warehouse full of retro stuff.
Always the same crap coming up at least once a month.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 18:52:

People are complaining about a 32 GB DDR5 module for $350

I *wish* 32GB of DDR5 was only $350. Here in Canada such modules are around $500 to $600.

They've tripled in price in the span of just a couple months.

Yes, if you only consider buying the fastest option of a certain brand. Once you take a look at other brands below 6000 Mhz the price drops to $350.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 18:52:

People are complaining about a 32 GB DDR5 module for $350 yet own a 5070 GPU and a 5950X totaling to like $1400. It's funny when tin foil hat conspiracies appear about high prices and Big Tech buying up everything to take people's rights to own stuff, usually written by people who have enough disposable income to buy a 32 GB module every month. It's basically the same topic as "retro prices have gone up" written by people owning a warehouse full of retro stuff.
Always the same crap coming up at least once a month.

It's not tinfoil hat conspiracy, the OpenAI RAM deals and companies like Micron abandoning consumer market are no secret, it's all public and Big Tech was never shy about their intentions either. You seem desperate to lick some corporate boots so go ahead if you like, but don't try to minimize this.

Also, don't assume what hardware I or others have or what is our disposable income because you obviously don't know, otherwise you're making shit up just to prove your point.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 18:52:

People are complaining about a 32 GB DDR5 module for $350 yet own a 5070 GPU and a 5950X totaling to like $1400. It's funny when tin foil hat conspiracies appear about high prices and Big Tech buying up everything to take people's rights to own stuff, usually written by people who have enough disposable income to buy a 32 GB module every month. It's basically the same topic as "retro prices have gone up" written by people owning a warehouse full of retro stuff.
Always the same crap coming up at least once a month.

So, rather than actually pay attention to what is going on we should find fault with those who present the information so that we can continue to deny reality?

What a weird take.

If you think that "There are less Voodoo cards floating around unwanted, so prices are higher now." is a thing that only certain people should be permitted to say, and that it is "basically the same" as journalists putting in hundreds of hours to investigate and report on government\corporate collusion and corruption that explains why things are declining so rapidly for consumers... well... I don't know what to tell you. Go do some research I guess.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 19:09:

Yes, if you only consider buying the fastest option of a certain brand. Once you take a look at other brands below 6000 Mhz the price drops to $350.

Not that I've seen up here in Canada. Cheapest I've seen in 32GB DDR5 that is available is $450.

Most modules are $500+.

Note that this is in Canadian dollars. Stuff here is expensive.

Nice trolling.

Kingston ValueRAM RAM Module - 32 GB - DDR5-5600 available in pc-canada.com for $370 with plenty in stock.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 19:47:

Kingston ValueRAM RAM Module - 32 GB - DDR5-5600 available in pc-canada.com for $370 with plenty in stock.

Never heard of that site before. From what I've looked up, they sound a bit sketchy.

So in other words it's 540 US $ for a pair of regular memory sticks. Which is still crazy enough.

IBMFan wrote on 2025-12-23, 18:52:

People are complaining about a 32 GB DDR5 module for $350 yet own a 5070 GPU and a 5950X totaling to like $1400. It's funny when tin foil hat conspiracies appear about high prices and Big Tech buying up everything to take people's rights to own stuff, usually written by people who have enough disposable income to buy a 32 GB module every month. It's basically the same topic as "retro prices have gone up" written by people owning a warehouse full of retro stuff.
Always the same crap coming up at least once a month.

This would be similar to arguing people own a $100,000 truck and have no right to complain about ram tripling in price to a grand

More Canadian webshops sell the exact same model, one sells it for $326 USD.
Doesn't matter, I just pointed out that people complain all the time but hate when someone calls them out on it.