Samsung, SK hynix, Micron hit with US class action — accused of using HBM pivot to rig DRAM prices up 700% in 4 years
TL;DR
Samsung, SK hynix, and Micron — 89% of global DRAM — face a US class action filed June 25 alleging they used the HBM pivot as cover to throttle DDR3/DDR4 supply, driving prices up ~700% in four years.
The three companies holding 89% of global DRAM — Samsung 38%, SK hynix 29%, Micron 22% (Q1 2026) — were hit with an antitrust class action in the US District Court for the Northern District of California on June 25. Case number 3:26-cv-06345, filed by 14 individual consumers and 3 companies. The complaint alleges the three colluded from 2022 onward to divert traditional DRAM capacity into HBM and prop up prices on DDR3 and DDR4 — up roughly 700% over four years, with another 90% in Q1 2026 alone and 60% more in Q2.
The complaint's mechanical core: HBM and commodity DRAM share the same wafer pool, but each unit of HBM capacity consumes roughly 3× the wafer area of standard DRAM. The same 12-inch wafer ships far fewer bits as HBM. Plaintiffs argue "responding to AI demand by ramping HBM" is the wrapper, and the substance is a coordinated cut to DDR4/DDR3 production — visible at retail RAM prices, enterprise SSDs, server boards, and the Switch 2 BOM.
This is not the first time. In 2002 the same three were prosecuted by the DOJ for fixing DRAM prices from 1998 to 2002. Samsung paid $300M, Hynix (now SK hynix) paid $185M, Micron walked as a cooperating witness. 21 years later: same defendants, same market-share ordering, near-identical collusion theory. The only new wrapper is HBM.
The earnings line up. SK hynix Q1 2026 net profit doubled YoY, and Samsung's semiconductor division is back at 2018 cycle peaks. Tom's Hardware headlined it "RAMpocalypse." None of the three has commented.
If it works for the defendants, this is a media-driven retail suit that settles quietly for cents on the dollar with no e-discovery turning up internal emails; HBM dividends keep flowing through the AI super-cycle. If it doesn't, the DOJ revives a criminal case the way it did in 2002, and the three sign another plea — this time paying the fine out of HBM profit.
via Tom's Hardware / TrendForce / Huxiu / Tom's Guide
The complaint's mechanical core: HBM and commodity DRAM share the same wafer pool, but each unit of HBM capacity consumes roughly 3× the wafer area of standard DRAM. The same 12-inch wafer ships far fewer bits as HBM. Plaintiffs argue "responding to AI demand by ramping HBM" is the wrapper, and the substance is a coordinated cut to DDR4/DDR3 production — visible at retail RAM prices, enterprise SSDs, server boards, and the Switch 2 BOM.
This is not the first time. In 2002 the same three were prosecuted by the DOJ for fixing DRAM prices from 1998 to 2002. Samsung paid $300M, Hynix (now SK hynix) paid $185M, Micron walked as a cooperating witness. 21 years later: same defendants, same market-share ordering, near-identical collusion theory. The only new wrapper is HBM.
The earnings line up. SK hynix Q1 2026 net profit doubled YoY, and Samsung's semiconductor division is back at 2018 cycle peaks. Tom's Hardware headlined it "RAMpocalypse." None of the three has commented.
If it works for the defendants, this is a media-driven retail suit that settles quietly for cents on the dollar with no e-discovery turning up internal emails; HBM dividends keep flowing through the AI super-cycle. If it doesn't, the DOJ revives a criminal case the way it did in 2002, and the three sign another plea — this time paying the fine out of HBM profit.
via Tom's Hardware / TrendForce / Huxiu / Tom's Guide
