Components
Vulnerability Matrix
Where the price shock lands hardest. Heatmap sums QoQ % moves by category; diverging bars rank current severity.
Wafer Map · Component × Quarter Severity
Each die is a category-quarter cell. Yield ramp encodes QoQ price severity: pass (≤0%) → fail (≥30%). Hover to inspect.
NO DATA
PASS
MARGINAL
DEGRADED
FAIL
5×24 dies · hover to inspect
Heatmap · QoQ % Change by Category
Rows = component category, columns = quarter. Green = negative move; red = severe increase. Cells past the today marker are forecast.
| Category | Q1'24 | Q2'24 | Q3'24 | Q4'24 | Q1'25 | Q1'25 | Q2'25 | Q2'25 | Q3'25 | Q3'25 | Q4'25 | Q4'25 | Q1'26 | Q1'26 | Q2'26 | Q2'26 | Q3'26 | Q3'26 | Q3'26 | Q4'26 | Q1'27 | Q2'27 | Q3'27 | Q4'27 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| DRAM | 8 | 9 | 4 | 15 | 19 | 31 | 23 | 14 | 5 | 15 | 7 | 2 | -4 | -8 | -10 | |||||||||
| NAND | 5 | 5 | 4 | 10 | 16 | 21 | 20 | 12 | 4 | 12 | 7 | 1 | -5 | -8 | -9 | |||||||||
| GDDR | 10 | 14 | 16 | 21 | 26 | 23 | 15 | 10 | 4 | 18 | 9 | 2 | -5 | -8 | -9 | |||||||||
| HBM | 15 | 15 | 14 | 17 | 17 | 15 | 11 | 10 | 7 | 5 | 3 | 2 | 0 | -2 | -2 | |||||||||
| GPU |
Scale:-5%+3%+10%+25%+45%+80%
Severity Ranking · Peak Price Shock
Ordered from least (stable) to worst (allocation-driven). Axis is peak observed % increase.
Detail Table
Bottleneck, severity, lead-time impact, recovery outlook.
| Category | Bottleneck | Peak % | Recovery |
|---|---|---|---|
| DRAM / System RAM | Wafer reallocation to HBM (3x wafer footprint of DDR5) | +92% | Early 2028 |
| NAND / SSD Storage | Fab cleanrooms shifted to DRAM; enterprise QLC demand | +58% | Mid-2027 |
| VRAM / Consumer GPUs | GDDR7 3GB module cost tripled; CoWoS constrained | +87% | 2028 (RTX 60 delayed) |
| Motherboards & Passives | AI server VRM priority; high-grade MLCC shortage | +25% | Late 2027 |
| Mainstream CPUs | Mature nodes stable; hit by demand drop | +5% | Recovered |