HungryHamster

Yeah you need to note when this happens - these are burst spikes that can be really annoying. When you know how high these bursts in temp go, then you can set your idle range for your fan curves to cover them (I have my idle fan curve flatlined at ~650RPM up to 60C or 65C for eg. but typically, my CPU stays at low 30s in winter & mid-high 30s in Summer). 
 
Depends on the case & fans at how low RPM that idle ‘curve’ can be.

This is another reason to keep the speeds as low as possible along the curve. Heat is only a concern once you get up to at least 85-90c, so you can have them barely spinning up to something like 60, then at like 40% from 60-80, then 60% at 85 and max at 90-95, or something like that. People tend to think they have to keep their system cool all the time, but that's not the case. It can run a bit warm without hurting anything and be quieter as a result. You can also see if the control software will allow you to set a delay, so it will only ramp up if the temps stay above the threshold for a certain amount of time. I haven't had time to really play with it yet, but Fan Control looks like it can do this via hysteresis.

Correct. My point is that it to run it as low/quiet as possible to maintain temps, so very low at idle and higher under load as temps increase, but at each "step" only as high as necessary to keep the temps reasonable.

Personally I would set them all up on a fan curve. I don't use a static speed, but have my fans speed up as needed. (Typically using CPU temp). The fans don't need to spin so fast with the machine at idle. Might as well only have it be "loud" when it needs to be.

Whatever speeds provide the cooling needed at the quietest level possible. Other than that, with that setup, doesn't really matter. Without knowing the fan sizes/models I can't say for sure, but odds are you'd have to really try to create a negative pressure situation, and rear fan speed isn't going to make a huge difference whether it's at 50% or 100%. Intakes are much more important, since they're the ones actually bringing fresh, cool air in. The rear is just helping move the air in a current/stream, but think of it more as a training wheel than a main one.

Not all of them, some of them are other things like CPU temperature. It depends on the specific board how they're laid out, though for the most part I wouldn't worry about any of the motherboard temps unless they somehow got over 100C. 

36C is summer temps in some places, of course it is safe.
Nobody checks motherboard temps, they check a specific component of it, mostly VRM temps, because it directly affects CPU performance if the VRM is throttling.

Depends on the sensor on the motherboard, that can sometimes be true, but most of the time when I think of motherboard temp sensors it's usually describing the VRM temps, which are very different than the ambient case temp. The VRM temp, as long as it's below 100C there's nothing to worry about, though on high end boards like you're probably running it's rare to see them get much above 60-70C. It's not a temp I'd worry too much about. 

DLSS runs the game at lower internal resolution and boosts the performance while attempting to reduce effects of running the game at lower resolution.
 
DLAA runs the game at same resolution as before but attempts to deal with AA without having having to deal with more taxing AA solutions (like MSAA).
 
Graphical options are so messed up with FH5 right now that I don't even think I can recommend any AA option other than TAA or DLAA (Exclusive to RTX cards, TAA is as good or even better in some instances imo). I used enjoy the game with MSAA and FXAA on together, now they removed that and state of AA in the game is an absolute garbage.

Technically, they are different, but in typical enthusiast circles, the two are used interchangeably. I'm sure some people somewhere are upset about this fact, but if you hear "load" and "utilization" or "usage," the person probably just means "the number the CPU or core is reporting in Task Manager/HWInfo/RTSS."

@HungryHamster
 
On Intel CPUs, CPU Load and what the Task Manager reports for CPU Utilization are not even close to the same thing. Everyone just assumes that they are the same but they are not. 
 
For Intel, CPU Utilization is calculated based on the base frequency of the processor. Most Intel CPUs in recent memory use Turbo Boost when they are running at full speed. The higher the percentage of turbo boost a CPU uses, the higher the CPU Utilization will be reported compared to actual CPU Usage. 
 
Here is a good example. The TS Bench test is used to load 10 Threads of a 20 Thread CPU. CPU Usage is 50% plus any Windows background tasks. ThrottleStop shows this as the CPU spending 50.2% of its time in the C0 state working on this task. The Task Manager shows this as a consistent 69% Utilization.
 

 
Here is why.
 
The 10850K has a base multiplier of 36. When this is increased to 50, the Utilization data is also scaled. 
 
50.2% Usage X ( 50 / 36 ) = 69.7% Utilization
 
Everyone likes looking at those Windows graphs to judge how much CPU usage is happening. Only the Task Manager Details tab shows CPU usage. The nice Task Manager graphs are graphing meaningless information on computers with Intel turbo boosted CPUs. 

In what units are each measured in? Assuming you have time on the x axis and the variable of interest is on the y axis. If its just percentage with no other information, then it's not much to go off of. 

Technically, yes. Implementation wise, it depends on how each is being calculated.
 
There are a few different ways they could be different but still "right":
Kernel + User CPU usage vs User only CPU usage Core 0 usage vs Overall usage Sampling frequency + average calculations How far of a difference are we talking? Is there any additional information?

I assume u hit 100c in r23 ? 
 
basicaly go bios and find vcore set to offset mode set to negative then drop by 0.01v go windows run r23 if u pass go back bios and drop it by same amount again untill u get a blue screen in r23 then put it back up like 0.3 for stability but my geuss is you can get something like 1.2v underload stable and u will currently be at like 1.35

As long as it's below 100c you're fine. 

Oh i get that. If the side panel is clear and you can see it, that blinking gets annoying fast. 

Oh I should also note, that setting turns off all fictional leds. If you need to trouble shoot something later, you might need to turn it back on. 

This was the option I found. The system in working state being set to aura only is the needed change. Then stealth more for off states so no lights are on. 
 

I forget the setting but I have a z690 hero and there is an option in the bios to turn that off. It is a hdd activity led. 

It's the HD_LED. There's probably a way to disable it in the BIOS if you really find it annoying, but don't know exactly where it would be off the top of my head. 
 
If you can't find it in a minute or so, electrical tape would probably be my solution.

I only updated bios a few times thorugh all theese years.
once on my brothers z97m plus due to a visual bug which made bios unusable I updated to solve. 
once on my thinkpad t420 before upgrading to quad core....which locked it out of quadcore instead lol. Manage to flash a version which did work with quadcore....should have not bothered updating and just ran the default. 
 
4 times on my current b550m tuf gaming.
1st for 5000 support back at launch
2nd to fix vga issue when getting my 3070 10 month later
3rd to suport my 5800x3d a week ago
4th another week later because asus added support for curve optimizer for the 5800x3d in bios.
 
So all have been due to issues with current bios or to support new functionallity or hardware. 
So if you don't have an issue you don't really have to bother. 
Possibly some AMD board from before 2021 and before may be more stable with higher speed memory on newer bioses....but then again you would probably notice issues already.
 
Like my 3600mhz cl16 have ran perfectly since ryzen 5000 launch anyway so I never had to update until I ran into the relatively small VGA issues.

I only update the BIOS when it's required...Fixing issues that I currently experience, installing a newly supported CPU, etc. Otherwise, I leave it alone.

I update mine when I first build it then never after that unless it resolves a particular problem I am having. BIOS to me is a why fix whats not broken type of a situation.

I was having issues with my z690 and didn't realize they were fixable through a bios update. They usually take about a year to iron out all the little bugs, and then the updates become infrequent. My general rule for bios is update only when you need to.
 
My work laptop is bugged from my IT group. My USB ports completely stop working once a month. So I refresh the bios drivers once a month on that baby and the USB ports magically come back to life.
 
As needed 🙂 

Just make sure to download it from the official site: https://www.techpowerup.com/301461/msi-afterburner-laced-with-malware-circulating-in-the-wild