DRAM Cartel: Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron accused of inflating RAM prices

697%. This is the cumulative increase in DRAM prices between mid-2024 and early 2026. And no, it's not just "the market" or "supply and demand" — at least, not if we believe the complaint filed on June 25th in front of a federal court in California.

Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron — the three companies that control 90% of the world's DRAM production — are accused of agreeing to cut classic memory production and inflate prices. A class action brought by 17 plaintiffs, including individuals and small PC companies.

The timing is interesting. While everyone is complaining about paying for their RAM at the price of an SSD, these three are making record margins on HBM memory for AI. Coincidence? The complainants say no.

The complaint, filed in the federal court of the Northern District of California (before Judge Noel Wise), invokes the Sherman Act Section 1 — the American antitrust law that prohibits agreements between competitors — and the Cartwright Act Californian.

Basically, the accusation says this: since the end of 2022, Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron would have coordinatedly reduced their production of classic DRAM (DDR3, DDR4, DDR5 for the general public). Not each on its own for legitimate business reasons. Together. Voluntarily.

The pretext invoked by manufacturers? The transition to HBM (High Bandwidth Memory), this ultra-fast memory demanded by Nvidia's AI GPUs. The complainants argue that this shift to HBM served as the perfect cover to dry up the standard DRAM market and drive up prices.

The complaint seeks class action status, tripled damages (treble damages, a classic of US antitrust law), and an injunction to force manufacturers to restore normal competition.

To understand the extent of the thing, you have to look at the numbers quarter by quarter. The increase is not a normal market adjustment - it is a brutal escalation.

Click to enlarge

A 32GB DDR5 kit that was selling for 80-120€ two years ago is now around 400€ in France at LDLC or Amazon. And even then, it's only when there is stock. LPDDR5X modules for laptops jumped by 89% in Q2 2026 alone.

On the side of contracts between manufacturers and OEMs, it's worse. TrendForce reports an increase of 105 to 110% in a single quarter on PC DRAM prices - unprecedented in the history of the memory market.

Where it gets interesting — and where the trial will be played out — is on the question of HBM.

HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) is the stacked memory found on datacenter GPUs like Nvidia H100/H200/B200. Each Nvidia Blackwell chip carries tens of GB of HBM3e that cost a fortune to produce. And the demand is exploding: AI datacenters would consume around 70% of the world's memory production according to some estimates.

The problem is that HBM is manufactured on the same lines as conventional DRAM. When Samsung converts a DDR5 line to an HBM3e line, this capacity disappears from the consumer market. SK Hynix is sold out until 2027. Micron is the same.

So far, nothing illegal — it's business. But the plaintiffs claim that the three of them coordinated to reduce standard production beyond what the HBM pivot justified . In other words: they could have maintained more DDR4/DDR5 consumer capacity, but chose not to. Together.

The share of HBM in DRAM production has gone from almost nothing to about 23% of wafers in 2026. That's big, but it leaves 77% for the rest. The question raised by the lawsuit: why have prices skyrocketed so much if three quarters of production still serve the traditional market?

And that's where history repeats itself. Because Samsung, SK Hynix (which was called Hynix at the time) and Micron have already been caught red-handed.

Between 1998 and 2002, these same manufacturers formed a cartel to fix DRAM prices. Not an allegation, not a suspicion — confessions of guilt before the American justice.

• Samsung : 300 million dollars in fines + executives in prison
• Hynix : 185 million dollars in fines + executives in prison
• Total fines DOJ : more than 731 million dollars
• Consumer compensation : 173 million via state attorneys

Micron, clever little one, had thrown his partners to the European authorities and obtained immunity on the EU side. But in the United States, everyone paid the price.

The fact that they have already been convicted for exactly the same type of practice proves nothing about 2026. But it gives the plaintiffs something to work with. And it makes the "it's just the market" a little less convincing.

Let's be honest: winning an antitrust lawsuit against semiconductor giants is an uphill battle.

Moreover, a similar complaint (but based on different facts) was dismissed in 2022 by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court had found that the plaintiffs had not provided sufficient credible evidence of coordination between manufacturers.

But this new complaint has a few cards up its sleeve that the previous one did not have. The main one: the simultaneous pivot to HBM The three manufacturers have reduced their classic DRAM production almost at the same time, with announcements and timings suspiciously aligned. If lawyers manage to demonstrate that this synchronization is not just the result of identical market forces but of active coordination, it changes everything.

The magnitude of the increases also plays a role. +697% in less than two years, in a market controlled by three players, attracts attention. Even without direct evidence (emails, secret meetings), a set of economic indicators may be enough to keep the case alive.

The trial is likely to last for years. There will be no verdict before 2028-2029 at the earliest. But the mere existence of this complaint puts pressure on manufacturers.

Concretely, this complaint will not lower the price of your DDR5 memory module tomorrow morning. Antitrust lawsuits are long, complicated, and even in case of victory, individual compensations are often derisory (you might receive $12 in 5 years, great).

On the other hand, media and legal pressure can push manufacturers to be a little less aggressive on production cuts. This already happened with the LCD scandal in the 2000s and the hard drive one: prices stabilized before the end of the procedures.

In the meantime, if you have to build a PC, Jefferies analysts still predict a further +40 to 50% increase in Q3 2026. The real calm is not expected until 2028, when new production capacities come online.

The advice remains the same: if you find DDR5 at a price that doesn't make you cry, take it. Good deals on RAM are over for a while.

A class action (collective action) filed on June 25, 2026 in California. It accuses the three largest DRAM manufacturers in the world of agreeing to reduce the production of consumer memory and inflate prices. The complaint invokes the Sherman Act, the main US antitrust law.

Not in the short term, no. An antitrust trial of this magnitude takes years. DRAM prices depend mainly on real supply and demand, and as long as AI consumes the majority of memory capacity, prices will remain high. Analysts do not see a significant drop before 2028.

Yes. In 2005, Samsung paid 300 million dollars in fines and Hynix 185 million for price fixing of DRAM between 1998 and 2002. Executives went to prison. The total DOJ fines exceeded 731 million dollars.

HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) is a stacked memory used in AI chips (Nvidia H100, B200...). It is manufactured on the same production lines as conventional DRAM. When manufacturers convert DDR5 lines to HBM lines, the available capacity for the general public decreases, which drives prices up.

Around 400€ at LDLC or Amazon France in July 2026 for a 2x16 Go DDR5-6000 kit. Two years ago, the same type of kit was between 80 and 120€. Some high-end kits exceed 430€.

Three companies. 90% of the market. Prices multiplied by 8. And a history of conviction for the same offense. It is unknown whether this complaint will lead to anything, but the questions it raises deserve to be asked.

AI is an easy target. It's true that HBM consumes capacity. It's true that demand is exploding. But when the only three manufacturers in the world all decide at the same time to cut consumer production, and prices increase by x8, the word "coincidence" has its limits.

Case to follow.