The annual 618 e-commerce promotions have traditionally been a window for price reductions in the domestic notebook industry. Brands rely on platform subsidies, inventory liquidation, and sales volume incentives to lower prices, aligning with the two major demand drivers of students entering school and professionals upgrading office equipment. According to IDC's PC retail annual reports from 2016 to 2025, the average price of PCs during the 618 period dropped by 7%-12% annually over the decade, with promotional discounts becoming an industry norm.

In June 2026, this industry practice was completely upended. Lenovo, HP, Dell, ASUS, and Acer—the five major global PC brands—completed two rounds of official price adjustments, marking a rare instance of price hikes during the 618 period. According to a survey of offline stores in Zhongguancun's national business districts, authorized retailers widely adopted daily pricing adjustments for notebooks in May and June, making intra-day price changes commonplace.

As of June 22, 2026, the five major PC manufacturers had issued formal price adjustment letters to their national distribution channels on April 14 and June 8, raising factory-recommended prices and terminal controlled prices. The adjustments covered all sales channels, including online self-operated platforms and offline authorized stores, across all price ranges and models. A June inventory survey by Pacific Technology revealed that domestic distributors' notebook stockpiles had fallen to their lowest level since the third quarter of 2023. After joint verification by IDC and TrendForce, the price hikes were attributed to rigid cost pass-through from upstream supply chains, with no evidence of collusive pricing or malicious price manipulation.

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

A nationwide survey of offline channels by Pacific Technology revealed that this round of industry-wide price hikes differed from previous years' minor or regional adjustments, featuring three key characteristics: comprehensiveness, tiered pricing, and counter-cyclicality. These adjustments represented a top-down cost pass-through across the industrial chain.

The price hikes were implemented in two compliant phases, with official channel documentation retained throughout. The first round in mid-April focused on factory-gate prices, with all five manufacturers uniformly raising wholesale prices by 6%-10%. The second round in early June targeted retail prices, with brands relaxing price controls and allowing authorized dealers to raise retail prices within a compliant range. Terminal price increases ranged from 4%-12%, based on actual market transaction prices.

The price adjustments covered all major brands without exceptions. Domestic brands like Lenovo, ASUS, and Mechrevo, along with overseas brands like HP, Dell, and Acer, all raised prices. Three major product categories—AI business notebooks, lightweight office notebooks, and high-performance gaming notebooks—saw simultaneous price increases, with niche budget brands following suit, leading to unified industry pricing.

Based on terminal transaction data monitored by TrendForce on June 20, price hikes varied significantly by tier: 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 creation notebooks above 8,000 RMB increased by 16%-19%, reflecting stronger profit recovery demands for premium models.

Promotional discounts were significantly reduced this year. 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 higher than their April regular-season prices, dashing consumer expectations for bargain purchases during the promotion.

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

Supply chain analysts unanimously agree that the encroachment of AI computing power capacity on civilian production capacity is the primary driver of this round of notebook price hikes. This industrial shift has reshaped global semiconductor capacity 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 capacity to AI server HBM high-speed memory production lines, while simultaneously reducing capacity for civilian DDR5 memory and NAND flash storage.

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

Spot price monitoring data from TrendForce between December 2025 and June 2026 showed that civilian DDR5 memory and solid-state drive (SSD) spot prices had surged 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 noted that memory components now account for 37.5% of the total material cost of notebooks.

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

III. Across-the-Board Raw Material Price Increases Drive Up Contract Manufacturing Costs

In addition to price hikes for core computing components, raw materials for notebook structures, power supplies, and exterior components also rose, creating a synergistic cost increase across the entire supply chain. This continued to compress (translated as 'squeeze') brand profit margins, necessitating terminal price increases.

Q1 2026 commodity closing price data from the Shanghai Stock Exchange showed that industrial electrolytic copper, flame-retardant engineering plastics, and aluminum alloy sheets 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 China Industrial Association of Power Sources confirmed that procurement costs for low-voltage polymer battery cells for notebooks rose by 13% year-to-date, with both panels and batteries showing steady cost increases.

Quanta Computer and Compal Electronics, two major PC contract manufacturers, announced new fulfillment rules, extending delivery lead times for notebook-specific PCB motherboards from six weeks to up to six months. Contract manufacturing service fees were uniformly raised by 11%, indicating across-the-board increases in fulfillment costs.

IDC's Q4 2025 PC profitability report revealed that the average gross margin for domestic consumer notebooks was just 5.9%. Leading brands leveraged their supply chain scale to offset costs through negotiation, while second-tier and smaller brands, with weaker bargaining power, could not absorb component price increases independently and had to raise terminal prices to maintain operations.

IV. Supply-Demand Dynamics + Industry Transformation Reinforce Brand Pricing Confidence

This round of price hikes was not merely a passive response to cost pressures. The simultaneous release of summer demand and manufacturers' strategic business transformations provided dual support, solidifying the industry's pricing foundation and suggesting long-term price adjustments rather than short-term market fluctuations.

IDC's May offline consumer survey revealed a concentrated release of demand from May to July due to college entrance exams and new professionals purchasing office equipment. Orders for education-oriented notebooks surged by 46% quarter-on-quarter, significantly boosting terminal spot demand.

Risk-averse stockpiling by distribution channels further exacerbated spot 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 minimum quotas. Market-available inventory struggled to meet rigid demand, amplifying spot price premiums.

Lenovo and HP's quarterly financial reports from 2023 to 2024 disclosed negative gross margins for their sub-4,000 RMB entry-level office models over multiple quarters, resulting in periodic losses for their consumer PC businesses and signaling the end of the industry's low-margin, high-volume competition model.

The five major manufacturers' 2026 product plans were finalized, with a deliberate reduction in production capacity for low-margin entry-level models and increased investment in 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. Clear Behavioral Divergence Among Consumers, Channels, and Brands

Combining IDC retail data, offline channel visits, and brand financial reports, distinct behavioral patterns emerged among consumers, offline dealers, and brands 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 volume-decline, price-increase trend. Consumer tiers clearly differentiated: those with urgent needs prioritized spot purchases, becoming less price-sensitive; non-urgent users generally adopted a wait-and-see approach; and the audience for high-end gaming notebooks priced above 10,000 RMB remained stable, with steady spot market turnover.

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

Pricing authority returned to brand manufacturers. This round of price adjustments was uniformly directed by brands, which controlled pricing across all channels and prohibited unauthorized dealer price cuts or cross-regional sales. Dealer pricing autonomy was significantly curtailed, strengthening brands' control over terminal prices.

Brands adopted tiered pricing strategies to balance profitability goals with market reputation. Entry-level office models saw minor price increases to stabilize the mass market, while AI notebooks and gaming models experienced moderate price hikes to boost revenue. The liquidation pace of 2025 legacy models slowed, with affordable existing models retaining budget-conscious customers and mitigating market backlash. (Produced by Zitai)