Historically, the 618 e-commerce promotions have been a traditional window for price reductions in China's notebook industry. Brands lowered prices through platform subsidies, inventory clearance, and sales volume incentives, aligning with the strong demand for device upgrades among students and office workers. According to IDC's annual PC retail reports from 2016 to 2025, the average price of PCs during the 618 promotions dropped by 7%-12% annually over the decade, with promotional discounts becoming an industry norm.

In June 2026, this industry practice was completely disrupted. Lenovo, HP, Dell, ASUS, and Acer—the five major global PC brands—implemented two rounds of official price increases, marking a rare instance of price hikes during the 618 promotions. A survey of offline stores in Zhongguancun's national business districts revealed that authorized retailers widely adopted daily pricing adjustments for notebook inventory in May and June, making intra-day price fluctuations commonplace.

As of June 22, 2026, the five major PC manufacturers had issued formal price adjustment notices to their national distribution channels on April 14 and June 8, raising factory-recommended prices and terminal-controlled selling prices. The price hikes covered all sales channels, including online direct sales and offline authorized stores, and applied to models across all price ranges. A June inventory survey by Pacific Technology showed that domestic distributors' notebook stock levels had fallen to their lowest point since the third quarter of 2023. After joint verification by IDC and TrendForce, it was confirmed that the price increases stemmed from rigid cost increases in the upstream supply chain, with no evidence of collusive pricing or malicious price manipulation.

I. Industry-Wide Tiered Price Adjustments Break Promotional Pricing Norms

A nationwide offline channel survey by Pacific Technology revealed that this round of industry-wide price hikes differed from previous years' minor or regional adjustments. It exhibited three key characteristics: comprehensiveness, tiered structuring, and counter-cyclicality, reflecting a top-down cost adjustment across the supply chain.

The price hikes were implemented in two regulated phases, with official documentation retained throughout. The first round in mid-April focused on factory-level adjustments, with all five manufacturers uniformly raising wholesale prices by 6%-10%. The second round in early June targeted retail terminals, with brands relaxing price controls and authorized dealers compliantly raising retail prices by 4%-12%, based on actual market transaction prices.

The price adjustments covered all major brands without exemption. Domestic brands like Lenovo, ASUS, and Mechrevo, along with overseas brands such as HP, Dell, and Acer, implemented across-the-board price increases. Three major product categories—AI business notebooks, lightweight office notebooks, and high-performance gaming notebooks—saw simultaneous price hikes, with niche budget brands following suit, leading to a unified industry pricing trend.

Based on TrendForce's June 20 terminal transaction monitoring data, the price increases showed clear tiered differentiation: entry-level office notebooks under 4,000 RMB saw average price increases of 8%-10%; mid-range all-purpose models priced between 5,000-8,000 RMB rose by 12%-15%; and high-end gaming and AI creative notebooks above 8,000 RMB increased by 16%-19%, reflecting stronger profit recovery demands for premium models.

This year's promotional discounts were significantly reduced. Backend data from Tmall and JD.com showed a 40% year-on-year decrease in platform-specific notebook subsidies. The five leading brands canceled policies such as billion-yuan subsidies for popular models and large cross-store discounts. A 618 price review by Sina Finance revealed that prices for 23 industry benchmark models remained flat or increased compared to their April regular selling prices, disappointing consumer expectations for low-priced purchases during promotions.

II. Restructuring of Computing Power Production Capacity Causes Severe Supply-Demand Imbalance in Consumer-Grade Core Components

Supply chain analysts unanimously agree that the encroachment of AI computing power production on civilian production capacity is the core driver of this round of notebook price hikes. This industrial transformation has reshaped global semiconductor production allocation logic, distinguishing it from previous material cost increases.

Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron's 2026 capacity white papers clearly state that the three major memory manufacturers will allocate 70%-85% of their advanced wafer production capacity to AI server HBM high-speed memory lines, while simultaneously reducing production capacity for civilian DDR5 memory and NAND flash storage.

According to calculations in Notebookcheck's hardware computing power industry report, a single AI server consumes 8-10 times more memory components than a standard consumer notebook. The global DRAM production capacity allocation for 2026 has been finalized, with 64% allocated to AI computing data centers and only 29% to civilian consumer electronics.

Spot market monitoring data from TrendForce between December 2025 and June 2026 showed that spot prices for civilian DDR5 memory and solid-state drives (SSDs) had cumulatively increased by 287% year-to-date. Specifically, the average price of 16GB DDR5 memory modules for notebooks rose from 302 RMB at year-end to 1,480 RMB in June. Gartner's Q2 PC cost report indicated that memory components now account for 37.5% of the total material costs in notebook manufacturing.

TSMC's Q2 capacity announcement revealed that its advanced manufacturing processes prioritize NVIDIA's AI chip foundry orders, leading to extended delivery times for notebook mobile processors and RTX 50 series discrete graphics cards. Chip bulk procurement prices increased by 8% quarter-on-quarter.

III. Rising Costs Across the Entire Supply Chain Drive Up Contract Manufacturing and Fulfillment Expenses

In addition to price increases for core computing components, raw materials for notebook structures, power supplies, and exterior components also rose, creating a cost resonance across the entire supply chain. This continuously compressed brand profit margins, necessitating terminal price increases.

Q1 2026 closing data for major commodities on the Shanghai Stock Exchange showed that industrial electrolytic copper, flame-retardant engineering plastics, and aluminum alloy sheets specifically for notebooks increased by 7%-10% quarter-on-quarter. These materials are primarily used in chassis and thermal module manufacturing, raising overall structural production costs.

Sigmaintell's June panel industry report indicated that procurement prices for 14-inch and 16-inch high-refresh-rate notebook displays increased by 6% quarter-on-quarter in Q2. Data from the Lithium Battery Industry Association confirmed that procurement costs for low-voltage polymer battery cells for notebooks rose by 13% year-to-date, with both panels and battery cells showing steady cost increases.

Major PC contract manufacturers Quanta and Compal announced new fulfillment regulations, extending delivery times for notebook-specific PCB motherboards from the standard 6 weeks to up to 6 months, while uniformly raising contract manufacturing service fees by 11%, indicating across-the-board increases in manufacturing fulfillment costs.

IDC's Q4 2025 PC profitability report showed that the average gross profit margin for domestic consumer notebooks was only 5.9%. While leading brands leveraged their supply chain scale to offset costs, smaller second-tier brands with weaker bargaining power were unable to absorb component price increases independently and had to raise terminal prices to maintain operations.

IV. Combined Supply-Demand Pressures and Industry Transformation Solidify Brand Pricing Rationale

This round of price hikes was not merely a passive response to cost increases. The simultaneous release of peak summer demand and manufacturers' strategic business transformations provided dual support, establishing a solid foundation for industry-wide price adjustments. These factors suggest that the price increases are likely to persist long-term rather than representing short-term market fluctuations.

IDC's May offline consumer survey revealed a concentrated release of demand for notebook upgrades from May to July, driven by college entrance and new workplace entrants. Orders for education-oriented notebooks increased by 46% quarter-on-quarter, significantly boosting terminal demand for readily available stock.

Risk-averse stockpiling by distribution channels further exacerbated stock shortages. Anticipating price volatility in components, dealers abandoned the traditional model of large-scale seasonal stockpiling for profit and instead adopted minimal replenishment based on brand-mandated minimum quotas. This left market inventory unable to meet surge demand, amplifying spot market premiums.

Lenovo and HP's quarterly financial reports from 2023 to 2024 disclosed that their entry-level office models priced below 4,000 RMB had suffered negative gross margins for multiple consecutive quarters, resulting in periodic losses for their consumer PC businesses. This marked the end of the industry's low-price, high-volume competition model.

The five major manufacturers' 2026 product plans confirmed a strategic shift: they actively reduced production capacity for low-margin entry-level models while increasing production of AI PCs equipped with dedicated NPU computing chips. AI PCs, priced higher than traditional models, raised the industry's average price floor through product mix optimization.

V. Distinct Behavioral Divergence Among Consumers, Channels, and Brands

Combining IDC retail data, offline channel visits, and brand financial reports, it is evident that consumer, dealer, and brand behaviors have diverged significantly following the price hikes, leading to structural changes in the industry's volume-price dynamics.

IDC's Q1 2026 domestic PC retail data showed a 19.2% year-on-year decline in online notebook sales, while average transaction prices increased by 2.5% year-on-year, indicating a trend of declining volume but rising prices. Consumer behavior clearly stratified: those with urgent needs prioritized purchasing available stock with reduced price sensitivity; non-urgent users generally adopted a wait-and-see approach; and the market for high-end gaming notebooks priced over 10,000 RMB remained stable with steady stock turnover.

Offline channels adopted a uniformly conservative operating stance, abandoning seasonal stockpiling practices. First- and second-tier authorized dealers proactively reduced inventory levels, with industry participants noting that frequent intra-day component price adjustments made stockpiling prone to asset devaluation losses. Small-volume, on-demand replenishment became the industry consensus.

Pricing authority shifted back to brand manufacturers. This round of price adjustments was uniformly directed by brands, which implemented strict price controls across all channels and prohibited unauthorized price cuts or cross-regional sales. This significantly reduced dealers' autonomy in pricing adjustments and strengthened brands' control over terminal pricing.

Brands adopted tiered pricing strategies to balance profitability goals with market reputation. Entry-level office models saw minor price increases to maintain mass-market stability, while AI notebooks and gaming models experienced moderate price hikes to boost revenue. Brands also slowed the clearance of 2025 models, using affordable legacy models to retain budget-conscious consumers and mitigate market backlash. (Produced by Zitai)