Building a PC price is not double lol and RAM is nowhere near up 6-8x

https://www.bestbuy.com/product/crucial-pro-overclocking-32g...

That 32GB for $274 was not $34-$45 in the summer. RAM is up like 3x, but RAM is one of the cheaper parts of the PC.

RAM that was $100 in summer is like $300 now when I look. So that's an extra $200 maybe $300, on say a $1500 build.

GPUs are not up, they are still at MSRP:

https://www.bestbuy.com/product/asus-prime-nvidia-geforce-rt...

SSDs are up marginally, maybe $50 more lets say for a 2TB.

So from summer you are looking at like a $250-350 increase on say a $1500 PC

I paid $150 for a 64GB DDR5 in Jan 2025. That is today $830 representing 5.5x.

What are the specs of the kit?

Here is some proper data:

https://pcpartpicker.com/trends/price/memory/

The same site also has price trends for CPUs, video cards, etc.

It's OK data, but the average can be skewed high by some vastly inflated options that nobody cares about.

Most people will pick a ram spec and buy whatever is the cheapest kit for that spec at the time.

I think the best data view would be what is the cheapest available kit for each spec over time rather than the average price of each kit.

Wouldn't historical data also be inflated by the gold plated Monster branded RAM sticks too though? Making the now to then comparison, well, comparable.

Not sure I agree with this.

Something that skewed the market in the past, which is unrelated the the reasons the market is skewed now doesn't make a compelling comparison.

The reasons would lead to differing levels of market skew.

Where I live, a pair of Kingston FURY Beast Black RGB DDR5 6000MHz 32GB (2x16GB) has literally gone up from what is equivalent to $125 this summer, to currently selling for what is equivalent to $850.

Obviously this depends on where you live.

I think looking at the same exact product from the same retailer is not really the full story. Personally I would accept looking at the same exact spec ram across retailers in your region. Maybe its still a lot more for you, but in the US it's not as bad as I see people say.

Realistically people normally buy whatever ram is the cheapest for the specs they want at the time of purchase, so that's the realistic cost increase IMO.

Corsair Vengeance 128 GB (2 x 64 GB) DDR5-6400. $339 in Sept 2025. $1599 in Jan 3026. 4.7x increase. https://pcpartpicker.com/product/LPvscf/corsair-vengeance-12...

I cancelled my plans to upgrade my workstation, as the price of 256 GB of RAM became ridiculous.

The MRSP for those GPUs is already inflated. There's a reason Nvidia is going to start making more RTX 3060 GPUs. Because people (and system builders) can't afford 40XX and 50XX GPUs.

Difference is subscriptions need to support IT staff, data centers, and profit margins. A computer under your desk at home has none of those support costs and it gets price competition from used parts which subscriptions don't have.

Cloud (storage, compute, whatever) has so far consistently been more expensive than local compute over even short timeframes (storage especially, I can buy a portable 2TB drive for the equivalent of one year of the entry level 2TB dropbox plan). These shortage spikes don't seem likely to change that? Especially since the ones feeling the most pressure to pay these inflated prices are the cloud providers that are causing the demand spike in the first place. Just like with previous demand spikes, as a consumer you have alternatives such as used or waiting it out. And in the meantime you can laugh at all your geforce now buddies who just got slapped with usage restrictions and overage fees.

Subscription is still worth it for most people though. Sure it costs more, but your 2TB plan isn't a single harddrive, it is likely across several harddrives with RAID ensuring that when (not if!) they fail no data is lost, plus remote backups. When something breaks the subscription fixes that for no extra charge.

If you know how to admin a computer and have time for it, then doing it yourself is cheaper. However make sure you are comparing the real costs - not just the 2TB, but the backup system (that is tested to work), and all your time.

That said, subscriptions have all too often failed reasonable privacy standards. This is an important part of the cost that is rarely accounted for.

I’m not even sure it does cost more. I could have a geforcenow subscription for like 8 years before it’s more expensive than building a similar spec gaming rig.

Depends on the service, and timeframes. For geforcenow, you also need to consider the upgrade cycle - how often would you need to upgrade to play a newer game? I'm not sure but probably at least once within that 8 years. Buying a new car, or almost new car, and driving it until it falls apart is a better financial option than leasing. But if you want a new car every year or two, leasing is more affordable - for that scenario. Also it depends on usage. My brother in law probably plays a video game once every other month. At that point, on demand pricing (or borrowing for me) is much better than purchase or consistent subscription. You need to run the numbers.

Depends on how much you play. geforcenow is limited to 100 hours a month, with additional hours sold at a 200% premium. This dramatically changes the economics ( https://www.techpowerup.com/344359/nvidia-puts-100-hour-mont... has a handy chart for this )

Yikes. If you're playing more than 100 hours a month then it's time to touch grass.

I'm not sure what the value of shaming people's hobbies is. 3 hours a day is easy if it's your primary hobby, and likely double/triple that on weekends.

If you live alone by yourself such that the concept of a shared gaming system is entirely unimaginable, maybe you're the one that needs to touch grass

The business model of Facebook, YouTube, traditional TV, app stores, and yes video games depend on people not touching grass.

> Sure it costs more, but your 2TB plan isn't a single harddrive, it is likely across several harddrives with RAID ensuring that when (not if!) they fail no data is lost, plus remote backups. When something breaks the subscription fixes that for no extra charge.

Well yes, of course. And for cloud compute you get that same uptime expectation. Which if you need it is wonderful (and for something like data arguably critical for almost everyone). But if we're just talking something like a video game console? Ehhh, not so much. So no, you don't include the backup system cost just because cloud has it. You only include that cost if you want it.

> ...that doesn't seem too bad.

Yep, "seem". But the reality is more like 3 different subscriptions going up by $5/month, and the new computer is a once-in-4-years purchase:

$5/month * 3 subscriptions * 48 months = $720.00

And no bets on those subscriptions being up to $20 or so by the end of year 4.

But if you finance the computer (not hard to get 0% financing on consumer electronics), the price goes from $41 a month to $62 a month. It’s the same difference.

For whatever reason, people are just more into paying for $10 / subscription fees, than they into financing stuff.

To such a degree that they able to pay for a bunch of subscriptions they completely forget about.

The mental model of subscriptions and financing are totally different. If I'm paying a subscription I might cancel next month, and that's a sort of freedom. If I'm financing a piece of hardware I don't want to stop paying, I want that hardware, so that's a commitment.

The difference is that with financing you're stuck with it (and your credit rating drops, at least in the EU here). You're not stuck with a subscription. If your income changes and you can't afford it anymore then you can cancel your subscription.

Oh sure, my original comment’s point was just to allude to the point that costs are going up for all methods of compute, so that fact alone shouldn’t influence your buy versus rent versus finance decision too much.

This idea that there’s a conspiracy to take personal computing away from the masses seems far fetched to me.

In the US if you don't have any debt, that is bad for your credit rating. Perversely, the more debt you have, the easier it is to get more credit, at least up to a point.

> people are just more into paying for $10 / subscription fees, than they into financing stuff

I'm not so sure, seeing the explosion of Buy Now Pay Later (BNPL) platforms.

The common thread is that people are bad and saving and delayed gratification. The easiest path to instant gratification wins more often than not.

For some reason I think people are less likely to finance a computer, but maybe not, given that phone financing is a thing.

Just go to the Apple website and notice how every computer price has a monthly payment option in the same font size right under the purchase price.

Numerous places are advertising financing groceries and eating out these days.

https://www.paypal.com/us/digital-wallet/ways-to-pay/buy-now...

https://www.klarna.com/us/store/5130c1b0-9c21-4870-b7ed-b610...