The latest AMD AGESA 1.0.0.7 AM5 platform microcode that the company recently released to improve stability of machines powered by Ryzen 7000X3D processors, more importantly, prevent them from physical damage due to increased voltage in voltage-assisted overclocking scenarios; reportedly impacts memory overclocking capabilities, too, reports g01d3nm4ng0. The "PROCHOT Control" and "PROCHOT Deassertation Ramp" toggles that were available in the oldest versions of AGESA for AM5, are not available in the latest production AGESA.

The memory compatibility is also affected. AMD recently added support for odd-density DDR5 memory modules, such as 24 GB and 48 GB, which make up 48 GB and 96 GB 2-module (dual-channel, four sub-channel) kits. It is possible to max out 192 GB, but while the older AGESA 1.0.0.6 allowed memory frequencies of up to DDR5-6000 with SoC voltage of 1.3 V, the newer AGESA is only stable up to DDR5-4400 at this density. To be fair, most motherboards advertise maximum memory frequencies of under DDR5-4800 for memory configurations where there are two DIMMs per channel, and both DIMMs are dual-rank (so four dual-rank DIMMs in all, which is the least optimal memory configuration from a memory frequency and latency perspective).

MSI has been in close contact with the AMD and has referred to their official technical guidance to provide users with a safer and more optimized hardware environment. To achieve this goal, MSI will release a new list of BIOS updates specifically for the AMD Ryzen 7000 series CPU.

According to AMD's design specifications, the Ryzen 7000X3D series CPU does not fully support overclocking or overvoltage adjustments, including CPU ratio and CPU Vcore voltage. However, AMD EXPO technology can be used to optimize memory performance by appropriately increasing the CPU SoC voltage to ensure system stability when operating at higher memory frequencies.

Netlist Inc. an enterprise solid state storage drive specialist has been awarded over $303 million in damages by a federal jury in Texas on April 21, over apparent patent infringement on Samsung's part. Netlist has alleged that the South Korean multinational electronics corporation had knowingly infringed on five patents, all relating to improvements in data processing within the design makeup of memory modules intended for high performance computing (HPC) purposes. The Irvine, CA-based computer-memory specialist has sued Samsung in the past - with a legal suit filed at the Federal District Court for the Central District of California.

Netlist was seemingly pleased by the verdict reached at the time (2021) when the court: "granted summary judgements in favor of Netlist and against Samsung for material breach of various obligations under the Joint Development and License Agreement (JDLA), which the parties executed in November 2015. A summary judgment is a final determination rendered by the judge and has the same force and effect as a final ruling after a jury trial in litigation."