Slashdot Mirror
A DIMM Future for RAM Bundles
VeggiePossum23 writes "PC WORLD has an article about rising concerns that computer manufacturers will be cutting the amount of bundled RAM they sell with their PCs owing to rising prices of dynamic memory. The article claims that spot pricing shows a rise of almost $15.00 for 256MB modules of DDR DRAM in some markets. According to a Reuters article on ZDNet, the price rises are caused by shortage of memory chips, and this is causing the prices of memory to raise at the fastest rate in four years. Even Intel is said to be worried at the overall trend of price hikes for all types of memory. The Inquirer has a similiar article from a couple of weeks ago which includes a chart showing how the third-party memory manufacturers are doing. Kingston tops the chart for revenue."
glad I just upgraded. Even if it increases 15.00 dollars its still so much cheaper than it used to be.
You mean Chinese countries have stopped dumping cheap RAM into the national market? Or is it the booming economy causing inflation?
You say things that offend me and I can deal with it. Can you?
Let's not hope this means the reintroduction of "MemoryDoubler" products. Or SpeedHalfers, as they are sometimes called...
IMHO the reduction won't affect serious computer users except in terms of the cost. If it costs me $50 more to get the 1GB of DDR RAM, well, I'll probably pay it.
Where it will hurt people is the technologically illiterate, who simply take the default Dell configuration or whatever and then wonder why their systems are always low on RAM.
Join the Empire! http://www.empirereborn.net/
A lot of the shortage has to do with the fact that companies are not starting to split their resources between DDR and DDR2. Between that, and the fact that it seems like companies may buy lots of replacement computers this year (2001 was the last strong year for purchasing, and 3-year replacement cycles are typical).
So yea, be prepared to pay higher prices for gas, milk (and associated dairy products like ice cream), meat, RAM and who knows what else this year.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
Ok how come the toaster manufacturers and automobile manufacturers don't seem to have this supply and demand problem? I chose these two because one seems pretty simple to make and the other exponentially more difficult and yet I can buy either without having to worry about significant increases in pricing each week. I just don't get it.
Then again I didn't read the article either
***I GOT NUTHIN***
...that epoxy factory in Japan burned to the ground in the mid-late 90s?
/ek
I remember all the talking heads saying RAM prices would be exhorbinate for YEARS to come.
Supply problems are short-lived, really.
I always buy the minimum amount of memory offered when I buy a pre-built system. The OEMs want too much $/byte for pre-installed memory. The most cost effective way to get memory for a new system is to buy it from somebody like Crucial/Micron.
It's sad that people need to reserve tons of memory for the OPERATING SYSTEM itself and not just the programs that run on top of it.
are because the industry is so cut-throat. In good DRAM times, companies crowd in, adding new production capacity and trying to make a quick buck. They know this is going to kill prices a couple years down the road, but if they don't do it, they'll be left out in the cold as competitors grab their market share. Sure enough, a couple of years later oversupply kicks in. Companies manufacture less DRAM, shift production to more profitable products, etc... And the cycle begins anew. I really don't know what started it, unless it was the 1987 DRAM crash, when all but one US manufacturer dropped the DRAM business due to intense Japanese competition. (And illegal dumping, as it turned out.)
Adding to this now is a fairly major transition from 200-300mm wafers. No matter what the DRAM companies tell you, they're never as good with their process as they claim they are. (I used to work for one of them.) Everyone is struggling to some degree with 0.11 micron compared to 0.13, and everyone (except perhaps Infineon, who started with it about three years ago) is struggling with 300mm wafer technology compared to 200mm.
Add it all up, and it very likely is a legitimate shortage. No price fixing here.
1. Ram mfgs get together, collude to raise prices
2. Brokers sell stocks of Ram mfgs on promise of increased profits
3. Collusion breaks down as mfgs increase production to take advantage of better margins
4. Prices go even lower
Lather, rinse, repeat.
All pass beyond reach of medicine. None pass beyond the reach of love.
Considering that the last time I bought RAM, I paid $1/MB, current RAM prices could quadruple, and I'd still be happy. Besides, what kind of apps do you need more than say, 256MB RAM? Hell, most machines I see these days ship with 512MB, which is more than I need.
I should think AMD should be even more worried. Their whole 64-bit computing initiative stood to gain a huge boost in the coming year as Windows 2003 finally got 64-bit support and server configuration with >4GB became mainstreamed. Now, folks might be looking at the larger memory requirements for 64-bit systems and try to stertch it a bit with a 32-bit Intel processor for a bit longer.
sigs are a waste of space
This "news" about top memory pricing repeats itself every halfyear for 20 years. Perhaps it's time to hit those international memory syndicates?
There you are, staring at me again.
I'm old enough to have seen the cycle through a number of times now. Price hikes in RAM always happen about 6-9 months before the price goes through the floor on the next development cycle.
Get ready for VERY cheap RAM again in 2005.
I want that. I'm sick and fucking tired of games that require me to buy new hardware, but have nothing new but slightly improved graphics. If you need a higher CPU/RAM for some awesome new kickass gameplay or AI, thats cool. But graphics are good enough already. Forget about graphicas and work on gameplay. Gameplay for the past year or two has been SEVERELY lacking. WHo the fuck wants to play FPS #12000567 which is the same as #13000566 but with a different name for the shotgun? Until they come out with something that needs more horsepower for the gameplay itself, I should never need to upgrade again- consoles or my computer.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
Compare UT2004:
Executable file: under 2 megabytes /System directory (exe, settings, mutators): 56MB
/Sounds (voice, announcer, shots, ambients): 353MB
/Maps: 1550MB
/Textures: 2790MB
Entire
The whole thing is just going in a viscious cycle - the better game engines we have, the more video card power we need. The better the video card, the higher resolution we can run it in and keep it playable. The more resolution, the higher quality graphics we need on screen. The higher quality the graphics, the more space they take up. Textures alone take up half of the UT2004 install footprint. If you want to start reducing install sizes, start on the graphics quality first.
In most cases, it's the quantity, not speed, that matters anyway. The mantra is, keep everything in memory to minimize disk I/O since even the slowest memory is faster than the fastest disk.
If I have to choose between 512MB of Dual Channel RAM and 1GB of Single Channel for my PC, I'd pick 1GB. Choice is easy.