Production of DDR4 memory and motherboards is restarting amid unprecedented memory shortages — PC industry preparing for a world without DDR5

Mushkin Redline ECC Black DDR4-3600 C16
(Image credit: Tom's Hardware)

The PC industry is bracing for a slip back to DDR4 memory among enthusiasts. Tom’s Hardware has learned at Computex 2026 that both motherboard brands and many module houses — the companies that produce the DIMMs you can buy — are shifting their strategy toward a resurgence in DDR4 platforms as unprecedented memory shortages and price increases continue to raise the entry point into building a PC. Those pain points are particularly acute with DDR5 memory.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
TOPICS
Jake Roach
Senior Analyst, CPUs

Jake Roach is the Senior CPU Analyst at Tom’s Hardware, writing reviews, news, and features about the latest consumer and workstation processors.

  • hotaru251
    people acting like this is some horrible thing....DDR4 is fine.
    very few things in the world actually "need" fastest memory you can get. majority of it is fine running on DDR4 as its still fast.
    Reply
  • Gururu
    hotaru251 said:
    people acting like this is some horrible thing....DDR4 is fine.
    very few things in the world actually "need" fastest memory you can get. majority of it is fine running on DDR4 as its still fast.
    That is exactly why I am still using a flip phone.
    Reply
  • endocine
    "Although there is already DDR4 in the market, it’s also easier to produce, which would help elevate some of the bottlenecks in the current memory supply chain."

    Why would it do that, because they are diverting DDR5 production?
    Reply
  • PEnns
    At this stage, I would be willing to use DDR3, maybe raise my 16 to 64 GB (my 4790 would love them and the prices are like in the good old days!

    Except, most available sticks on Amazon are from dubious / never heard of companies and the few known names (GSkill, Patriot) sell them only in 8 GB sticks....and if you find 2x16 or 2x32 they'd cost as much as DDR4 or 5!!)

    We're stuck in RAM hell till maybe 2040!
    Reply
  • King_V
    Funnily enough, I found myself looking at this article from Tom's (November 2025) just a day or two ago. Also found myself curious about DDR4 vs DDR3, though, I suspect the jump between those two was significantly larger
    Reply
  • laszlozoltan
    it's about time- I had picked up 2 Samsung 870 evo 2tb ssd back in Jan for $199. ea (Cdn)
    I was shocked the other day when, curious after installing one of those into my pc the price is now listed at $1410 !
    Reply
  • dmitche31958
    Sounds very good to me. I have an older AMD 3600x and I'm still happy with it. Sure, I wish that it was faster but for the amount of money they want these days for every part it isn't worth changing. All I wanted was to add another 16GB of memory so I could run a local LLM.
    Since I couldn't get the memory cheap enough I gave up on the idea and I'll simply run it at work on their systems. :(
    Reply
  • usertests
    hotaru251 said:
    people acting like this is some horrible thing....DDR4 is fine.
    very few things in the world actually "need" fastest memory you can get. majority of it is fine running on DDR4 as its still fast.
    It's great news. I have some machines with only 16-32 GB that I'd love to upgrade to 64 GB, and increased/restarted production is the way to eventually make that a cheap upgrade.

    And there's nothing stopping me from buying even more DDR4 based machines. I'm sure plenty of people will be buying and selling used Comet/Rocket/Alder/Raptor/Zen systems a decade from now.
    PEnns said:
    Except, most available sticks on Amazon are from dubious / never heard of companies and the few known names (GSkill, Patriot) sell them only in 8 GB sticks....and if you find 2x16 or 2x32 they'd cost as much as DDR4 or 5!!)
    There are no 32 GB DDR3 sticks. 16 GB is the maximum. Please don't get scammed!

    Moreover, older Intel DDR3 CPUs may have trouble supporting the larger ones:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDR3_SDRAM
    The DDR3 standard permits DRAM chip capacities of up to 8 gigabits (Gbit) (so 1 gigabyte by DRAM chip), and up to four ranks of 64 Gbit each for a total maximum of 16 gigabytes (GB) per DDR3 DIMM. Because of a hardware limitation not fixed until Ivy Bridge-E in 2013, most older Intel CPUs only support up to 4-Gbit chips for 8 GB DIMMs (Intel's Core 2 DDR3 chipsets only support up to 2 Gbit). All AMD CPUs correctly support the full specification for 16 GB DDR3 DIMMs. Intel also supports 16 GB DIMMs, from Broadwell (also named as "AMD Only" memory, because of using 11-bit addressing).

    Maybe it's not a scam but actually RDIMMs instead of UDIMMs that you are noticing. Not sure, but be careful.
    Reply
  • ezst036
    endocine said:
    Why would it do that, because they are diverting DDR5 production?
    I was thinking about that issue of production diversion also.

    Mass producing more and more and more DDR5 of course would bring costs down, as we saw with Micron's exit and that making them go up.(the reverse situation)

    But it is said that DDR4 is more simple to produce. I've not currently well-read about those details but it stands to reason that more simple to produce = cheaper costs.
    Reply
  • ohio_buckeye
    Glad I’ve got my ryzen 5 7500x3d and 32gb of ddr5 on a b850 board. This should hold me for a while. Maybe when they release zen 7 if it’s compatible to my board then something like an 11800x3d should be a nice upgrade and give me a few more years.
    Reply