Samsung’s Galaxy S26 faces a value problem it can’t ignore

We’re barely a week into 2026 and the year isn’t shaping up to be a particularly great one for our bank balances. The global RAM squeeze is expected to drive up the cost of countless gadgets in the coming months. According to the latest reports, the Galaxy S26 series is set for a price hike when it launches in just a few weeks’ time. The news comes shortly after Samsung Electronics failed to reach a longer-term agreement to buy memory chips from its sister division, Samsung Semiconductor; it must now compete for quarterly contracts like everyone else.

There’s an added twist to this tale, however; price increases may not apply evenly to every region and every model. So far, South Korea appears set to see higher costs in the region of 88,000 won (~$60) for a 256GB configuration. However, the expectation is that US consumers will still pay $799, $999, and $1299 for the Galaxy S26, Plus, and Ultra, respectively. You have to wonder if Apple’s consistent iPhone prices and huge US market share have essentially tied Samsung’s hands, forcing it to absorb the costs to remain competitive in such a key market.

Either way, the news seems palatable if you’re a US consumer, but much harder to swallow if you live elsewhere. Especially given that some customers might also end up paying more for hardware that doesn’t appear to move the needle. This could make the Galaxy S26 one of, if not the most contentious, Samsung flagships in recent years.

Higher prices for the same hardware

No one likes price increases, especially when it feels like we’re paying more for the same hardware that we could have previously bought for less. Unfortunately, the Galaxy S26 series appears to be falling into that category, if the rumors turn out to be true. With the same camera specs we’ve had for years and displays that will look exactly the same as before, it appears that some customers will be paying the added RAM tax for a buying decision that increasingly feels like a compromise rather than a major upgrade.

To be fair to Samsung, there are some improvements on the way. If leaked specifications are to be believed, the Galaxy S26 will feature a larger base storage model and a slightly larger battery (although it won’t rival the 7,000mAh behemoths now available). Likewise, the Galaxy S26 Ultra is set to gain faster 65W charging and a new M14 display panel, albeit with the same core specs as last generation. All three phones will also be upgraded with newer, faster processors and will boast a slightly tweaked design. Whether that’s worth an extra $60 or so to global consumers will be hotly debated, no doubt, and it might be a better financial decision for international customers just to pick up a Galaxy S25 today.

The age-old Exynos versus Snapdragon debate throws another layer of fuel on the fire this year. While the Galaxy S26 Ultra will use Snapdragon in every region, it’s expected that the less expensive Galaxy S26 and S26 Plus will ship with Samsung’s new Exynos 2600 processor in at least some regions. Samsung adopted a similar strategy in previous years, much to the displeasure of a vocal group of Samsung fans. However, it stuck with the Snapdragon 8 Elite for the entire S25 lineup, due to performance discrepancies and issues with its manufacturing line.

The Exynos 2600’s combination of a new Arm C1-Ultra at 3.8GHz, three C1-Pro cores at 3.25GHz, and six C1-Pro cores at 2.75GHz CPUs, along with the Xclipse 960 GPU, should be plenty powerful. Paired with a new AI NPU engine and image processing units, all built on Samsung’s cutting-edge 2nm GAA technology, the Exynos 2600 is undoubtedly a high-end chipset. However, whether it’ll win the benchmark and, perhaps more importantly, the perception battle against Qualcomm’s Snapdragon 8 Elite Gen 5 is less clear-cut.

If this all wasn’t controversial enough, a return to Exynos had been expected to save Samsung some money, in the region of $20 to $30. It was always doubtful that this cost-saving would be passed directly on to consumers; we had perhaps hoped it would at least avoid large price increases this year, which always makes the Exynos vs Snapdragon trade-off more palatable. However, it appears that RAM prices have eaten into that margin and then some, and no one wants to pay more for an inferior chip, even if the margins are small.

Is it all out of Samsung’s hands?

Of course, Samsung is facing the same challenges as virtually every other company in the tech industry. As RAM manufacturers shift their attention to more lucrative chips for the AI computing craze, the less profitable RAM that our phones, laptops, and GPUs rely on is suddenly facing acute supply shortages and price increases. Samsung can’t really do anything about that (apart from pester its Semiconductor arm to reprioritize its manufacturing line!), and it won’t be the only smartphone company to raise prices this year. Samsung has already quietly increased the cost of the Galaxy A series in India, and Xiaomi has also warned that prices will rise for both affordable and flagship products this year.

Still, Samsung may not have done itself any favors with what virtually everyone agrees has been a relatively stagnant series. If Samsung had kept the line ticking along with incremental upgrades to the cameras, storage specs, or made bolder aesthetic changes, there might be a bit more sympathy for moderate price increases in the current climate.

Instead, the company has doubled down on Galaxy AI in the past couple of generations, pinning significant engineering efforts on software features for which the jury is still out. Given that many Galaxy AI features are backported to older models, they are hardly major sales factors for brand-new hardware. In the meantime, the flagship Galaxy S hardware package has been getting by on the bare minimum of changes each year, and now at least some of us should expect to pay even more at a time when Samsung’s hardware conservatism is harder than ever to justify.

Perceptions won’t be helped by the fact that US consumers could end up avoiding the price increase, while at least some countries around the world have to pay more. Can international markets really be expected to subsidize Samsung’s battle for US market share with Apple? Is that even a duel Samsung can win without pushing harder into bleeding-edge hardware? Will consumers put up with knowing that they’re paying extra and potentially receiving less when it comes to Exynos? This could all backfire.

Of course, Samsung has ways to soften the blow, at least on paper. Aggressive carrier subsidies, inflated trade-in values, and limited-time launch promotions have become standard tools for masking price increases. On a two- or three-year contract, many buyers may never feel the full impact of a higher MSRP at all. But these tactics don’t change the underlying value proposition — they merely defer the pain. International buyers, especially those who prefer to buy unlocked, are far more exposed to the real cost increase.

The problem isn’t simply that the Galaxy S26 looks set to cost more — it’s that Samsung may be asking customers to accept higher prices, uneven regional treatment, and renewed Exynos skepticism all at once. Many potential customers may be left scratching their heads and wondering not just why the Galaxy S26 is more expensive, but what, exactly, they’re getting in return.