Counterpoint: Samsung HBM revenue share jumped to 33% in Q2 2026
Key takeaways
- Counterpoint's latest table, published September 1, puts Samsung at 33% of global HBM revenue in Q2 2026, up from 21% in Q1 and 15% a year earlier.
- SK hynix remained first at 50%, down from 58% in Q1 and 64% in Q2 2025; Micron slipped to 18% from 21%.
- The SK hynix-Samsung gap narrowed to 17 percentage points from 37 points in Q1.
- All three major suppliers are now tied to NVIDIA's HBM4 supply chain, but Counterpoint says most current HBM revenue still comes from HBM3E.
- The commercial question is no longer simply qualification. It is how HBM4 production and customer allocation translate into sustained revenue share.
Counterpoint Research's latest quarterly data shows Samsung captured 33% of global HBM revenue in the April-June quarter, up 12 percentage points from Q1. SK hynix remained the market leader at 50%, down eight points, while Micron fell three points to 18%. The rounded figures total 101%, which Counterpoint attributes to rounding.
The shift is larger on a year-over-year basis. Samsung's share rose 18 percentage points from 15% in Q2 2025, while SK hynix fell 14 points from 64% and Micron fell three points from 21%. The SK hynix-Samsung lead narrowed from 37 percentage points in Q1 2026 to 17 points in Q2.
A September 3 report from Yonhap independently highlighted the same Counterpoint data and said Counterpoint expects Samsung's share to increase gradually as HBM4 shipments ramp.
Samsung's gain comes before HBM4 dominates revenue
| Supplier | Q2 2025 | Q1 2026 | Q2 2026 | QoQ change |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| SK hynix | 64% | 58% | 50% | -8pp |
| Samsung | 15% | 21% | 33% | +12pp |
| Micron | 21% | 21% | 18% | -3pp |
Counterpoint explicitly says most HBM revenue still comes from HBM3E and expects HBM4 shipments to become more visible in the second half of 2026. That means the Q2 share rotation should not be read as a clean HBM4 market-share table.
The distinction matters because HBM revenue share combines volume, product mix and pricing. It does not directly disclose bit shipments, wafer starts, advanced-packaging capacity, customer allocation or qualified recurring volume.
There is, however, stronger evidence now that HBM4 is a three-supplier market. NVIDIA's June GTC Taipei presentation explicitly identified HBM4 from Micron, SK hynix and Samsung for Vera Rubin. Jensen Huang was separately reported in June as saying all three vendors had completed qualification testing.
Samsung said in February that it had begun HBM4 mass production and commercial shipments, and its Q2 results said HBM4 sales had scaled during the quarter. The company also began shipping HBM4E samples in May.
SK hynix said it began HBM4 mass shipments in Q2 and will ramp production in the second half. It has also finalized long-term agreements with around 10 customers.
Micron said its 36GB 12-high HBM4 entered volume shipment in Q1 2026 for NVIDIA Vera Rubin and that it had shipped samples of a 48GB 16-high HBM4 product.
Those milestones make qualification less of a binary differentiator than it was earlier in the cycle. The next test is allocation: how much qualified HBM4 each supplier can deliver repeatedly, at acceptable yield and economics, into production systems.
Broader DRAM data reinforces Samsung's recovery
Counterpoint's September update also puts Samsung first in the broader DRAM market with 38% of Q2 revenue. SK hynix fell to 25%, Micron rose to 24% and China's CXMT reached 10%. Counterpoint estimates the DRAM market grew 57% quarter over quarter and 385% year over year.
That broader recovery matters because Samsung's HBM gain is occurring alongside stronger conventional-memory economics rather than in isolation. It also means company-level memory revenue or profitability cannot be used as a proxy for HBM capacity.
The next data point is allocation, not qualification
Samsung's rise from 21% to 33% is a meaningful procurement signal. Buyers now have stronger evidence of a second scaled HBM supplier, while Micron remains a qualified third source. But a revenue-share gain does not prove equivalent spare capacity.
The Q2 movement could reflect a combination of shipment timing, HBM3E mix, HBM4 ramp, pricing and customer allocation. Counterpoint does not publish a common denominator for qualified HBM4 bits or stacks, so those effects cannot yet be separated from the revenue-share table.
For SK hynix, the risk is not that it has lost technological relevance: it remains the largest HBM supplier at 50%, has begun HBM4 mass shipments and continues to deepen its relationship with NVIDIA. The risk is that a three-way qualified supplier base reduces the allocation leverage associated with its earlier dominance.
For Samsung, the key question is whether the 33% share holds or rises as HBM4 becomes a larger part of industry revenue in the second half. For Micron, the issue is whether its early HBM4 volume shipments convert into a larger revenue share after its Q2 decline.
The next Counterpoint HBM table will therefore be more informative than another qualification announcement. If Samsung sustains a share near or above one-third while HBM4 becomes material to the revenue mix, the Q2 move will look increasingly structural. If SK hynix rebounds as HBM4 ramps, Q2 will look more like a timing and mix rotation.
For AI-accelerator buyers, the immediate read-through is favorable: three qualified HBM4 sources improve procurement optionality. For the suppliers, the next phase of competition shifts from proving that HBM4 works to proving that it can be delivered at scale, repeatedly and profitably.