The same Microsoft Surface I bought 4 months ago is 69% more expensive now – here’s why


Microsoft Surface Pro 12-inch

Kyle Kucharski/ZDNET

Follow ZDNET: Add us as a preferred source on Google.


ZDNET’s key takeaways

  • Memory and SSD costs could rise 130% by 2026, driving PC prices up.
  • Surface prices surged as much as 69% in recent months due to those costs. 
  • Rising component prices may shrink PC demand, especially entry-level options.

You think groceries are expensive? Wait until you hear what is happening to the cost of the memory and storage chips inside that PC you were thinking of buying later this year.

According to a recent Gartner report, the combined cost of DRAM and SSDs will increase by 130% by the end of 2026. The culprit, of course, is the insatiable demand for memory and storage from cloud providers building AI-related applications, and chip makers will not be able to catch up with demand for another year or two at least.

Also: 8GB of RAM is enough for a MacBook in 2026 – here’s why

Those soaring prices are already having an effect on the PC market, and the effect on Microsoft is especially severe.

Microsoft Surface prices surge

This week, Windows Central reported that Microsoft has dramatically increased the prices of its Surface PCs. I can personally attest to those increases.

In December 2025, just four months ago, I ordered a new top-of-the-line Surface Pro from the Microsoft Store. It was configured with a Snapdragon X Elite processor, an OLED display, 32GB of RAM, and a 1TB SSD (Type Cover not included). I am using that PC to write this post.

At the time, that Surface cost a grand total of $1,822.17, including tax and a four-year Microsoft Complete warranty, with a student/military/employer discount. That seemed like a pretty good deal, but I had no idea just how good a deal it was until today, when I checked the current price of that exact same configuration. The total bill with sales tax came to $3,071.63 — still with no Type Cover. That is a 69% price increase in only four months. Yikes.

Also: I compared virtual RAM with real RAM on my Windows PC – here’s what the numbers told me

When I checked other Surface devices, I found similar price hikes. The least expensive current model I could find, the 12-inch Surface Pro with 16GB of RAM and a 256GB SSD, now starts at $1,050.00, with $50 off if you buy it at Amazon. When it launched nine months ago, you could find it on sale for $729.

That is a 37% price increase, for those keeping score.

A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed that surging prices in its supply chain are to blame: “Due to recent increases in memory and component costs, Surface is updating pricing on Microsoft.com for its current-generation hardware portfolio,” they said in an emailed statement. “We remain committed to delivering value to customers and partners while upholding our standards for quality and innovation.”

The struggling PC market

Even before the price increases, the Surface line was struggling. As I wrote a little over two years ago, “The PC market is going through a major correction right now, and Surface is doing even worse than its rivals.” It is unlikely things have gotten better since then. Microsoft does not break out its PC sales and shipments, but Gartner’s report on worldwide PC shipments for Q1, released this week, offers some clues.

Year over year, PC shipments were up 4%, but that number was “artificially inflated [and] not due to genuine demand,” according to Gartner Research Principal Rishi Padhi. The real cause was vendors and channel distributors building up inventory levels ahead of expected price hikes in Q2. Those price hikes were, of course, “driven by rapidly rising memory price inflation (memflation), as well as DRAM and NAND flash component costs. This is especially true for lower-margin products.”

Also: The MacBook Neo just upended the budget laptop market

In that environment, Dell and Lenovo increased sales year over year, while HP shipments were down. Microsoft was not even in the top six suppliers worldwide, instead being grouped into “Others.” And that group saw shipments decline by 4.6%.

Meanwhile, Apple shipments for the quarter were up 12.7% worldwide, Gartner estimated, “primarily driven by robust demand for the MacBook Neo.” More on that in a minute.

Gartner predicts that the average PC price will increase by 17% by the end of 2026, and that will translate into dramatically lower shipments, as businesses and consumers hang on to existing devices for longer.

“This sharp increase removes vendors’ ability to absorb costs, making low-margin entry-level laptops nonviable,” said Gartner senior analyst Ranjit Atwal. “Ultimately, we expect the sub-$500 entry-level PC segment will disappear by 2028. In addition, rising AI PC prices will delay the projected 50% market penetration of AI PCs until 2028.”

That last part is especially bad news for Microsoft, which has hitched its wagon to the AI PC market with its Copilot+ PCs. Ironically, its own spending on cloud-powered AI services is helping to stall the market for the client devices needed to take advantage of those services.

What makes the MacBook Neo different?

If crushing increases in component costs are killing the cheap PC market, why was Apple able to succeed with its low-cost $599 MacBook Neo? Maybe it is because it does not have to buy memory on the open market.

The MacBook Neo is based on Apple’s A18 Pro SoC, which includes 8GB of RAM as part of a single package (unified memory), just like in the iPhone 16 Pro it was originally designed for. That is why there is no memory upgrade option for the Neo. As WCCF Tech reports:

Apple’s A18 Pro from 2024 utilizes TSMC’s InFO-POP (Integrated Fan-Out Package on Package) technology, meaning that the DRAM sits on top of the die as part of the silicon. The technology giant re-purposed the same SoC and incorporated it into the MacBook Neo, which is why the latter is limited to 8GB of RAM.

That chip is more than adequate for powering basic tasks on a Mac, and it can run rings around entry-level PC processors at the same price point.

Meanwhile, PC OEMs trying to compete at the low end, where they have always had a price advantage, do not have that option available. Qualcomm, Intel, and AMD do not have any SoCs with integrated memory that can be turned into a lightweight PC, and even if they could, 8GB is not enough to handle the workloads that Microsoft demands of Windows 11.

Also: Why buying DDR4 RAM is now a smarter play than DDR5

In theory, Apple can keep this up for a few more years. The A19 Pro has 12GB of RAM on board and could probably power a MacBook Neo 2 next year, while Windows PC makers will have serious problems producing competitive designs under $1000, at least not as long as those AI data centers continue their seemingly insatiable demand.

The biggest problem for Apple is that the MacBook Neo might be too successful. A well-sourced report says the device was designed around “chips that would otherwise have been scrapped — remember, Apple are the masters at recycling! But with MacBook Neo being insanely popular, the stock of those binned chips will run out before demand gets satisfied.”

Another report this week from MacRumors sums up the dilemma, “Apple’s initial plan was to have suppliers build around five to six million MacBook Neo units before ceasing production of the model with the A18 Pro chip, he said, but it sounds like demand is so strong that Apple might run out of A18 Pro chips to put in the MacBook Neo before the second-generation MacBook Neo with an A19 Pro chip is ready next year.”

That’s a good problem, relative to the chaos that PC makers are facing thanks to the overheated component market.

Gartner predicts that worldwide PC shipments will contract by more than 10% in 2026. But that total includes Macs, Windows PCs, and Chromebooks. I will not be surprised to see an even steeper drop-off for Windows PCs. And anyone who works in the Surface division at Microsoft should feel especially nervous.





Source link

Leave a Reply

Subscribe to Our Newsletter

Get our latest articles delivered straight to your inbox. No spam, we promise.

Recent Reviews


As I’m writing this, NVIDIA is the largest company in the world, with a market cap exceeding $4 trillion. Team Green is now the leader among the Magnificent Seven of the tech world, having surpassed them all in just a few short years.

The company has managed to reach these incredible heights with smart planning and by making the right moves for decades, the latest being the decision to sell shovels during the AI gold rush. Considering the current hardware landscape, there’s simply no reason for NVIDIA to rush a new gaming GPU generation for at least a few years. Here’s why.

Scarcity has become the new normal

Not even Nvidia is powerful enough to overcome market constraints

Global memory shortages have been a reality since late 2025, and they aren’t just affecting RAM and storage manufacturers. Rather, this impacts every company making any product that contains memory or storage—including graphics cards.

Since NVIDIA sells GPU and memory bundles to its partners, which they then solder onto PCBs and add cooling to create full-blown graphics cards, this means that NVIDIA doesn’t just have to battle other tech giants to secure a chunk of TSMC’s limited production capacity to produce its GPU chips. It also has to procure massive amounts of GPU memory, which has never been harder or more expensive to obtain.

While a company as large as NVIDIA certainly has long-term contracts that guarantee stable memory prices, those contracts aren’t going to last forever. The company has likely had to sign new ones, considering the GPU price surge that began at the beginning of 2026, with gaming graphics cards still being overpriced.

With GPU memory costing more than ever, NVIDIA has little reason to rush a new gaming GPU generation, because its gaming earnings are just a drop in the bucket compared to its total earnings.

NVIDIA is an AI company now

Gaming GPUs are taking a back seat

A graph showing NVIDIA revenue breakdown in the last few years. Credit: appeconomyinsights.com

NVIDIA’s gaming division had been its golden goose for decades, but come 2022, the company’s data center and AI division’s revenue started to balloon dramatically. By the beginning of fiscal year 2023, data center and AI revenue had surpassed that of the gaming division.

In fiscal year 2026 (which began on July 1, 2025, and ends on June 30, 2026), NVIDIA’s gaming revenue has contributed less than 8% of the company’s total earnings so far. On the other hand, the data center division has made almost 90% of NVIDIA’s total revenue in fiscal year 2026. What I’m trying to say is that NVIDIA is no longer a gaming company—it’s all about AI now.

Considering that we’re in the middle of the biggest memory shortage in history, and that its AI GPUs rake in almost ten times the revenue of gaming GPUs, there’s little reason for NVIDIA to funnel exorbitantly priced memory toward gaming GPUs. It’s much more profitable to put every memory chip they can get their hands on into AI GPU racks and continue receiving mountains of cash by selling them to AI behemoths.

The RTX 50 Super GPUs might never get released

A sign of times to come

NVIDIA’s RTX 50 Super series was supposed to increase memory capacity of its most popular gaming GPUs. The 16GB RTX 5080 was to be superseded by a 24GB RTX 5080 Super; the same fate would await the 16GB RTX 5070 Ti, while the 18GB RTX 5070 Super was to replace its 12GB non-Super sibling. But according to recent reports, NVIDIA has put it on ice.

The RTX 50 Super launch had been slated for this year’s CES in January, but after missing the show, it now looks like NVIDIA has delayed the lineup indefinitely. According to a recent report, NVIDIA doesn’t plan to launch a single new gaming GPU in 2026. Worse still, the RTX 60 series, which had been expected to debut sometime in 2027, has also been delayed.

A report by The Information (via Tom’s Hardware) states that NVIDIA had finalized the design and specs of its RTX 50 Super refresh, but the RAM-pocalypse threw a wrench into the works, forcing the company to “deprioritize RTX 50 Super production.” In other words, it’s exactly what I said a few paragraphs ago: selling enterprise GPU racks to AI companies is far more lucrative than selling comparatively cheaper GPUs to gamers, especially now that memory prices have been skyrocketing.

Before putting the RTX 50 series on ice, NVIDIA had already slashed its gaming GPU supply by about a fifth and started prioritizing models with less VRAM, like the 8GB versions of the RTX 5060 and RTX 5060 Ti, so this news isn’t that surprising.

So when can we expect RTX 60 GPUs?

Late 2028-ish?

A GPU with a pile of money around it. Credit: Lucas Gouveia / How-To Geek

The good news is that the RTX 60 series is definitely in the pipeline, and we will see it sooner or later. The bad news is that its release date is up in the air, and it’s best not to even think about pricing. The word on the street around CES 2026 was that NVIDIA would release the RTX 60 series in mid-2027, give or take a few months. But as of this writing, it’s increasingly likely we won’t see RTX 60 GPUs until 2028.

If you’ve been following the discussion around memory shortages, this won’t be surprising. In late 2025, the prognosis was that we wouldn’t see the end of the RAM-pocalypse until 2027, maybe 2028. But a recent statement by SK Hynix chairman (the company is one of the world’s three largest memory manufacturers) warns that the global memory shortage may last well into 2030.

If that turns out to be true, and if the global AI data center boom doesn’t slow down in the next few years, I wouldn’t be surprised if NVIDIA delays the RTX 60 GPUs as long as possible. There’s a good chance we won’t see them until the second half of 2028, and I wouldn’t be surprised if they miss that window as well if memory supply doesn’t recover by then. Data center GPUs are simply too profitable for NVIDIA to reserve a meaningful portion of memory for gaming graphics cards as long as shortages persist.


At least current-gen gaming GPUs are still a great option for any PC gamer

If there is a silver lining here, it is that current-gen gaming GPUs (NVIDIA RTX 50 and AMD Radeon RX 90) are still more than powerful enough for any current AAA title. Considering that Sony is reportedly delaying the PlayStation 6 and that global PC shipments are projected to see a sharp, double-digit decline in 2026, game developers have little incentive to push requirements beyond what current hardware can handle.

DLSS 5, on the other hand, may be the future of gaming, but no one likes it, and it will take a few years (and likely the arrival of the RTX 60 lineup) for it to mature and become usable on anything that’s not a heckin’ RTX 5090.

If you’re open to buying used GPUs, even last-gen gaming graphics cards offer tons of performance and are able to rein in any AAA game you throw at them. While we likely won’t get a new gaming GPU from NVIDIA for at least a few years, at least the ones we’ve got are great today and will continue to chew through any game for the foreseeable future.



Source link