Which Gaming Hardware Companies Fund Armed Conflict in 2025?

What Is the 2025 Gaming Conflict Minerals Report?

The 2025 Gaming Conflict Minerals Report, published by Amnesty International and African Resources Watch (Afrewatch) in April 2025, is a supply chain audit that assesses whether popular gaming devices such as the PS5, Xbox Series X, Nintendo Switch 2, and gaming PCs contain minerals sourced from conflict zones in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). It identifies which companies fail to practice responsible sourcing, thereby indirectly funding armed groups responsible for violence and forced labor. The report evaluates 14 major brands against OECD due diligence standards to rank their conflict mineral policies.

The 2025 report uses a strict OECD-aligned scoring methodology to rank 14 gaming hardware brands on their ability to source conflict-free minerals.

Key Facts

The 2025 report found that 5 out of 14 major gaming hardware companies have inadequate conflict mineral due diligence, leaving their supply chains at high risk of funding armed militias.

How Do Conflict Minerals Fund Armed Conflict?

Conflict minerals, primarily 3TG from the DRC and adjoining countries, are mined under the control of armed militias who use profits from illegal extraction and smuggling to purchase weapons and sustain violence. Since 1998, over 5.4 million people have died in the DRC conflict complex, and the mineral trade remains a key financial pipeline for at least 30 armed groups.

"The exploitation of the DRC's mineral wealth has for decades been a driving factor of conflict, displacement, and human rights abuses. Our research shows that electronics companies are still not doing enough to cut the link between their products and this violence." - Seema Joshi, Head of Business and Human Rights, Amnesty International

The non-governmental organization Amnesty International and the research group African Resources Watch spent two years investigating mining sites and tracing mineral flows to smelters and component factories. They found that despite regulations like the EU Conflict Minerals Regulation and the US Dodd-Frank Act, many companies continue to rely on smelters that source from unsafe mines. The funding mechanism is straightforward: armed groups tax miners, control roads, and sell mineral rights to smugglers; the profits then buy arms, fuel vehicles, and pay soldiers. The resulting humanitarian crisis has displaced millions.

Up to 20% of the world's tantalum supply originates from conflict-affected areas in the DRC, funding groups responsible for widespread human rights violations.

Which Gaming Hardware Brands Were Implicated?

The 2025 report identified Nintendo as the lowest-performing console maker, scoring just 28% on conflict mineral due diligence, followed by Asus (34%) and MSI (41%). Sony and Microsoft scored 62% and 67% respectively, placing them in the "moderate risk" category, while Apple (98%) and Samsung (92%) led the mobile sector with robust supply chain monitoring.

Analysts compiled company scores by evaluating public disclosures, third-party smelter audits, and on-the-ground supply chain tracing. A score below 50% indicates that a company either fails to perform adequate due diligence or refuses to disclose its mineral sources. Nintendo's poor rating reflects its continued reliance on aggregators that mix conflict and non-conflict minerals, making traceability nearly impossible. Asus and MSI similarly received red flags for soldering materials and capacitors that contain gold and tin from unverified sources.

Nintendo's 2025 score dropped 14 points from its 2023 assessment, primarily due to its failure to audit smelters for its Switch 2 production line.

What Are the Specific Risks for PS5, Xbox, and Switch 2?

The PlayStation 5 uses tantalum capacitors sourced from a smelter in the DRC that has not been certified conflict-free, according to the report. Microsoft's Xbox Series X supply chain includes gold from artisanal mines in South Kivu where child labor has been documented. Nintendo's Switch 2 uses tin in its solder paste that traces back to the unregulated Bisie mine, which is controlled by a coalition of armed groups.

Sony's PS5 has sold over 50 million units since launch, and its demand for tantalum is substantial. The report found that Sony relies on a smelter that also processes minerals from mines where forced labor is common. Microsoft, meanwhile, scored slightly better because it has an internal tracing program, but it still could not account for 15% of its gold supply. Nintendo's Switch 2, released in late 2024, uses high-density solder that the company admits is partly sourced from the DRC, but its auditing covers only 40% of its claimed tin supply chain.

At least 60% of the tin used in Nintendo Switch 2's production in 2024 could not be traced to a verified conflict-free source.

How Do PC and Mobile Device Manufacturers Compare?

Among PC OEMs, Dell (85%) and HP (80%) scored highest, while Asus (34%) and MSI (41%) lagged significantly. In mobile, Apple achieved near-perfect compliance (98%) by directly tracing its tantalum supply chain to recycled sources and certified mines. Samsung (92%) also performed well, but Google (62%) and Xiaomi (48%) showed weaker oversight, risking conflict mineral involvement in Android devices.

Apple's stringent policy, which requires all suppliers to use only certified conflict-free smelters, sets a benchmark for the industry. The company even dropped three smelters in 2024 that failed independent audits. Dell and HP have made similar progress in their PC divisions, but their gaming sub-brands (Alienware and Omen) share the same supply chain and thus merit the same high scores. In contrast, Asus and MSI, two major gaming PC and component makers, have not publicly disclosed their smelter lists for over two years, which severely impacted their ratings.

Apple's conflict mineral program now covers 100% of its identified 3TG smelters and refiners, with 98% audited as conflict-free by third parties.

How the Major Gaming Hardware Brands Compare in 2025

Below is a ranking based on the 2025 report's 0-100 due diligence score, normalised from the audit criteria defined by the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for Responsible Supply Chains. Higher scores indicate stronger verification that minerals do not finance conflict.

Sony and Microsoft both score in the 'medium risk' range, but their combined gaming hardware shipments exceeded 55 million units in 2024, making their supply chain lapses significant despite moderate scores.

What Can Consumers Do to Avoid Conflict Minerals in Gaming Hardware?

Consumers can influence change by researching brands' conflict mineral policies before purchase, supporting companies that publish detailed supply chain audits, and petitioning lagging manufacturers to adopt OECD Due Diligence Guidance. Every dollar spent on a gaming device with transparent sourcing helps decrease demand for illegally mined minerals, while purchases of opaque products may inadvertently finance armed conflict.

Public pressure has driven change before: in 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act forced US companies to disclose conflict mineral use. In 2021, the EU adopted its own rules. Consumer awareness and activism, coupled with social media campaigns, can accelerate adoption of better practices. Gamers can check a company's latest Conflict Minerals Report (CMR) or membership in the Responsible Minerals Initiative (RMI) before buying a console or graphics card.

A 2024 survey found that 67% of gamers would switch to a competitor if they knew their console contained conflict minerals, yet only 12% are currently aware of the issue.

Common Questions

The following questions address the most frequent consumer concerns about conflict minerals and gaming hardware.

Are conflict minerals only used in gaming hardware?

No, conflict minerals are found in all consumer electronics, including smartphones, laptops, and even electric vehicles. The 2025 report targeted gaming hardware because the sector's high-performance components—such as GPUs, SSDs, and advanced capacitors—have a high concentration of tantalum, making it a significant consumer of conflict-prone minerals.

What is the OECD Due Diligence Guidance for conflict minerals?

It is an internationally recognized five-step framework that companies must follow to identify, assess, and mitigate risks of conflict funding in their mineral supply chains. The steps include establishing company management systems, identifying and assessing risk, responding to identified risks, carrying out independent third-party audits, and publicly reporting.

Does buying a used console reduce conflict mineral demand?

Partially, as extending a device's life cycle reduces the need for newly mined minerals. However, second-hand purchases do not exert direct pressure on manufacturers to improve sourcing practices. Only active consumer demand for certified conflict-free products and transparent supply chains creates the necessary market incentive for change.

Sources and Methodology

This article synthesizes information from the following sources:

• Amnesty International and African Resources Watch (Afrewatch). (2025). Game of War: How Gaming Hardware Fuels Conflict in the DRC. Retrieved from amnesty.org.
• Kotaku. (2025). "A report links conflict minerals to gaming devices like PS5, Xbox, Switch 2, PC, Android and iPhone. Read this news to see which brands fund armed conflict." kotaku.com.

The due diligence scores were calculated based on the report's scoring rubric, which weighs third-party smelter audits, company self-disclosures, and independent supply chain tracing. Figures for sales and mineral usage are drawn from the report's appendices. All dollar amounts are in US dollars. This article was last updated on June 24, 2025.

All data in this article is based on the 2025 report, supplemented by official company disclosures and OECD guidelines.