Tech-Hounds.com

GeForce 7900GS Round Up

PCI Express x16 graphics cards
Chipset GeForce 7900GS 256 MB, 256 bit

Its been a long time coming, but the GeForce 7900GS is finally here. This is quite probably the most affordable card of the GeForce 7900 series. Although its missing one vertex unit and one quad pixel pipeline, it still retains much of the capabilities and performance of a GeForce 7900. Performance wise, it offers performance similar to the original GeForce 7900GT, which also means it's also very close to the original GeForce 7800GTX.

Finally, we're beginning to see higher clocked versions of the GeForce 7900GS throughout the world and not just the US and Europe, merely a month after it was officially launched. After all, NVIDIA have very little time to push the GeForce 7900GS to a market in which they do not have a contending SKU from ATI - the recently launched Radeon X1950 Pro. The introduction of higher clocked SKUs will allow NVIDIA and its partners some leverage in performance, at least at first before ATI's Radeon X1950 Pro start trickling down.

We said in our last article, the most appealing aspect of the GeForce 7900GS is its price. We already saw what a standard, reference clocked GeForce 7900GS can offer. Today we will try to find what kind of performance higher clocked versions offer. We have cards from three manufacturers, they are the ASUS EN7900GS, Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme.

Overview

ASUS EN7900GS
450/660 MHz

NVIDIA GeForce 7900GS, 256 MB GDDR3
Core Clock : 450 MHz
Memory Clock : 661 MHz (1320 MHz GDDR3)

Overall Score: 80 points



The ASUS EN7900GS is probably the odd card out of this round up. Those of you familiar with ASUS products will likely notice the lack of 'TOP' nomenclature, which indicates this is a standard, reference clocked GeForce 7900GS. Well, you're right. The card's core and memory clocks are running at standard specifications for a GeForce 7900GS.

Looking at the card itself, you'll no doubt notice the lack of any RAM sinks. We think this is unfortunate, since other vendors still manage to pack RAM sinks or at least integrated core and memory heatsinks with their offerings. Of course, this makes us wonder if the cost savings measure is offset by the bundle or the price. One explanation could the the software bundle - ASUS chose to bundle Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter with the EN7900GS. There's also the traditional CD case and the standard bundle: one DVI-to-analog dongle, an HDTV output cable and 6 pin ATX power cable, one driver CD containing ASUS utilities, enhanced drivers and other software extras and one CD containing the electronic version of the card's manual. There is a print version of SpeedSetup, containing most of the information a user will need to install the graphics card in their system. Except for the game bundle, it's a pretty standard bundle for a standard card. Hopefully ASUS will price the card accordingly for this card.

We did a routine check of RivaTuner's fan control tab to see what the fan control settings default value were. What we saw here seems to suggest the EN7900GS fan are set to the default values of every other GeForce 7900GS.



Pretty low settings, no doubt to maintain noise levels to a minimum. You might want to keep it at the level. At 100 percent (during boot up), the fans can be heard over your typical CPU and chipset fans, sounding much like the noise we heard from a GeForce 5900 Ultra at boot up. It does get pretty noticeable after long periods of heavy loads but those using a closed case shouldn't be bothered.by the noise. We fired up Quake 4's final level - the Nexus - for about 20 minutes to see how hot the card can get. Below is a snapshot from RivaTuner Hardware Monitoring window.



62° Celsius is average to say the least. Too bad ASUS decided not to include RAM sinks with this card, it would've made the card nicer and at least have a fighting chance compared to the other cards. There's a difference between cost savings and offering value to the customer. We think the lack of RAM sinks is a negative point for this card. While Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter is a good game, we don't thin its worth the lack of RAM sinks. Other reference clocked GeForce 7900GS cards like we used in our previous GeForce 7950 & 7900GS article, the Leadtek PX7900GS TDH bundled two games and include RAM sinks and cost about the same.

Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce
525/720 MHz

NVIDIA GeForce 7900GS, 256 MB GDDR3
Core Clock : 526 MHz
Memory Clock : 722 MHz (1444 MHz GDDR3)

Overall Score: 82.5 points



One look at the GeForce 7900GS and you could tell Gigabyte is sticking to the designs of their GeForce 7900GT. The heatsink is similar, though this time there's some additional copper fins, no doubt to help dissipate heat a little quicker. We'll have to see later if that really works. Other than that, there are no other notable differences. Even the core and memory clock is the same as the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GT TurboForce - 525 MHz for the core and 720 MHz for the memory (1440 MHz effective). The use of the traditional 12 volt ATX power connector instead of a 6 pin connector, connector covers to shield SLI, TV out and DVI ports are all still present on the GeForce 7900GS TurboForce.

The Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce probably has the best bundle of the three cards here today. There's one bundled game, the full version of Call of Juarez, two DVI-to-analog dongles, and a HDTV dongle. Granted, the game is not as well know as Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter but its still nice than no game at all. There's no 6 pin ATX cable in the bundle, since you don't need it anyway. A CD containing drivers, utilities, DVD playback software and other extras are included, as well as a print manual.  

Let's take a look at the fan's control speed settings via RivaTuner.



Well, that's low. Gigabyte must really want to make this card very quiet. The slightly revised heatsink and slower clock of the GeForce 7900GS should be an effective combination. Remember, the card is running with slightly higher clocks, pretty close to what they have with their GeForce 7900GT TurboForce. Let's see how the card stand up heat wise after around 20 minutes of Quake 4.



About 60° Celsius or 2° Celsius cooler than the ASUS EN7900GS. It's also 2° Celsius cooler than Gigabyte's own GeForce 7900GT TurboForce. The added copper fins is probably the cause. Hopefully, they can use a similar solution for other cards as well. The only drawback we can think of with this cooling solution is that takes more space than single slot cooling solutions. This may limit its appeal to those who do not have enough space in their motherboard or PC, especially if you're thinking about using two of them in an SLI setup..

Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme
520/700 MHz

NVIDIA GeForce 7900GS, 256 MB GDDR3
Core Clock : 522 MHz
Memory Clock : 702 MHz (1404 MHz GDDR3)

Overall Score: 85 points



The Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme is not that much different from the standard, reference clocked PX7900GS TDH we used in our last article. It's not even that different from their GeForce 7950GT offering. The PCB layout is the same, as do the cooling solution used although the color of the fans is blue instead of green on the GeForce 7950GT.As you can see, the cooling solution is a single slot solution, so it won't take up space from the adjacent slot next to your PCI x16 slot. Much like their other graphics cards, the heatsink covers both the core and memory, with one intake and one exhaust. This design is a good compromise between space, heat and noise, though we think a slower, but slightly larger diameter fan might improve the thermal management capabilities of the heatsink. There's still some space left in the upper area of the card, near the SLI connector and the upper DVI port and there's no extra components there, why not make use of the space?

The bundle is the standard fare from Leadtek - two full version games - Spell Force 2: Dominion Wars and Serious Sam II. There's also to other CDs, one containing all the drivers, utilities and one containing the DVD playback software and other software extras. Those finicky with manuals will be happy to know Leadtek maintains the tradition of including print versions of the graphics card manual and quick installation guide. Accessories wise, its pretty standard - one DVI-to-analog dongle, an HDTV cable and a 6 pix ATX power cable.

Let's take a peek at the fan control tab in RivaTuner.



They are the same as the ASUS EN7900GS, no doubt default values for GeForce 7900GS cards. Leadtek didn't find it necessary to change these settings, more likely because the heatsink used can handle heat from a GeForce 7950GT. Remember, the GeForce 7900GS core dissipate much less heat. Let's see how the PX7900GT fares after a session of Quake 4.



60° Celsius - the same as Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce. So, Leadtek managed to keep temperatures down and stick to a single slot solution. This mean this card is a boon for those wanting SLI setup but don't have more than one slot worth of space between the two PCI x16 slots - like we have on our MSI NForce4 K8N Platinum. The same also apply to those wanting to use a more powerful graphics card than a GeForce 7600GT in their HTPC setup or SFF PC.

Performance

Most of the cards here except for the ASUS EN7900GS are running at a slightly higher clocks. The Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and  PX7900GS Extreme core and memory clocks are not that much different - 522 / 720 MHz for the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and 520 / 700 MHz Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme, respectively. We expect the higher clocked cards to offer slightly higher frame rates than reference clocked cards. It will be interesting to see just by how much.

As usual, we'll be focusing on performance under default settings and with 4x AA and 16x AF. Anti aliasing and anisotropic filtering are applied from the in-game menu settings (or console) whenever possible. V-sync was disabled on both the driver panel and within the game, if present. The settings we used for each game are pretty much the same as our usual test settings.

F.E.A.R was set to the maximum quality (for both graphics and computer settings) but without Soft Shadows to allow performance testing with AA. Quake 4 was set to 'High Quality' while for Serious Sam II we used the 'Maximum' video options preset but with custom resolutions, AA and AF settings. Need For Speed: Most Wanted was set to to maximum quality, except for Reflection Update Rate, which was set to its minimum value. For The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, we used our usual settings, where we basically put every slider and detail to its maximum settings except for Tree and AI Distance. Self Shadows and Shadows on Grass are disabled. This setting is actually pretty close to Bethesda's Ultra Quality settings, which is the default setting for (most) high end cards (but without HDR to allow AA performance testing).

We'd like to thank Tagan for supplying the additional power supply for this article.

Our test setup
AMD Athlon 64 3500+ socket 939
2 x 1024 MB Kingston KVR 3-3-3 PC3200 DDR-SDRAM
MSI K8N NForce 4 SLI motherboard
Maxtor DiamondMaxPlus9 80 GBs Serial ATA 8 MB buffer
ASUS E-616 DVD-ROM
Tagan TG530-U15 530 watts ATX/BTX power supply

Windows XP Professional with Service Pack 2 installed
NVIDIA Forceware 84.21 reference driver
NVIDIA NForce 4 6.66 reference driver
Creative SoundBlaster Live! 24 bit 5.12.1.512 driver.
DirectX 9.0c

The graphs are pretty self explanatory, but in case you can't see the text, they're arranged in groups of three colors: green for minimum fps, blue for average fps and red for maximum fps. The first group represent test results under default settings, and the second represent results with 4xAA and 16xAF enabled.These results are in frame rate per second.

The results:

With slightly higher clocked core and memory, both the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme are faster than the reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS. The difference may not be very noticeable, but its there. However, both cards are still no match for the GeForce 7950GT. Not surprising, since the GeForce 7950GT is not only using a higher core and memory clock, but comes with more vertex and pixel units as well.

All the GeForce 7900GS cards do put up respectable numbers in F.E.A.R at close to maximum settings (without soft shadows), particularly without AA and AF. Both higher clocked cards put up minimum frame rates slightly above 30 fps at 1600 x 1200, while the slower ASUS EN7900GS is a single frame below 30 fps. Of course, those frame rates may change for the worse in actual gameplay, which will get into later.

Frame rates  above 1024 x 768 with AA and AF are certainly not high enough for comfortable gameplay - in our experience you'll want to have more than 35 fps minimum in F.E.A.R. This is expected, since these cards are really mainstream cards or performance class cards according to vendors. You'll need enthusiast level cards like the GeForce 7900GTX or equivalent if you want to play at higher resolutions with AA and AF enabled. Or you can pair two of these cards in SLI, which we'll get into later. The ASUS EN7900GS takes the last  position, the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme edging each other in the middle and the GeForce 7950GT comes in first. No doubt you'll notice the frame rate between these cards are not that different - 3 fps is less than 10 percent at 1024 x 768 with AA and AF though we see slightly higher differences in average frame rates (most likely from the higher frame rates on less graphically intensive parts of the test.


Keep in mind test results from gameplay testing sessions like these do have slightly higher variations between runs than F.E.A.R Performance Test. Focusing on minimum fps, the general trend seems to be these cards are only enough for 1024 x 768 without AA and AF, except for the GeForce 7950GT which still provide high enough minimum fps at 1280 x 960 without AA and AF. This is very different to what we saw earlier from F.E.A.R Performance Test Results. From our experience, those minimum frame rates happen on very graphically intensive scenes, so you might want to stick to 1024 x 768 without AA and AF if you're planning to buy any GeForce 7900GS card.

With that kind of performance, we shouldn't expect a strong performance from these cards with AA and AF enabled. All cards seems to drop to below 30 fps at 1024 x 768 with AA and AF, even the GeForce 7950GT. It may look like the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce have a slight advantage with minimum fps above 30 fps, but that's more likely normal variations between runs. The Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme which relatively have the same core and memory clock did dropped to 25 fps at some point. On average fps, all GeForce 7900GS put up respectable numbers, with the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce ahead of the ASUS EN7900GS and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme.


Results in the second part of the Afterimage level is similar what we saw in the first part. Without AA and AF, the GeForce 7900GS cards are good enough for 1024 x 768 and the GeForce 7950GT is fast enough to push 1280 x 960. There is a slight difference in the results. The reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS falls behind the higher clocked Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme by a significant margin - nearly 10 fps in both minimum and average fps. Compared to the GeForce 7950GT. both higher clocked GeForce 7900GS pretty much have similar minimum and average fps. Of course, as we mentioned earlier that quickly change when we up the resolution to 1280 x 960. From these results, there is a valid point to get the higher clocked cards over the reference clocked GeForce 7900GS.

Results with AA and AF enabled stayed pretty much the same as it did on the first part. Even the GeForce 7950GT dropped to below 30 fps at some point, just like all GeForce 7900GS cards. The ASUS EN7900GS is the slowest card here by about 10 percent to the higher clocked Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme, while the GeForce 7950GT is about 10 percent faster in average fps. Not really significant, since these differences more likely occur where you least need it - on less graphically intensive parts of the test.

So, repeating what we said earlier - if you're planning to buy a GeForce 7900GS, you probably should stick to 1024 x 768, without AA and AF n this game. Particularly, if you want frame rates that won't go below 35 fps or the ideal 40 fps minimum. The higher clocked GeForce 7900GS cards do have what it takes to keep you from dropping below 40 fps most of the time, unlike the standard GeForce 7900GS.


In Quake 4, things doesn't really get interesting until we enabled AA and AF at 1280 x 1024. The reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS is at a disadvantage here and again it must settle for the last place in this test. Both Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme is neck to neck here, with basically the same results. Slightly faster than both cards is the GeForce 7950GT. However, the difference is certainly not significant or even noticeable in gameplay - 3 fps for minimum fps and 2 - 6 fps for average fps. 38 to 44 fps minimum is undoubtedly fast enough for comfortable gameplay.

1600 x 1200 seems to be the limit for all GeForce 7 cards and these cards are no exception. The slower ASUS EN7900GS did dropped to below 30 fps at some point, while both higher clocked cards can still maintain a 30 fps minimum - slower by about 2 fps than the GeForce 7950GT. Of course, if you want to run Quake 4 at this resolution with AA and AF, your best option will likely be getting a faster card like the GeForce 7900GTX or equivalently performing card. GeForce 7900GS cards, including the higher clocked Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme is best suited for 1280 x 1024 with AA and AF and no higher. Little performance difference separates the higher clocked cards with the reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS in that regard.


Undoubtedly, this timedemo is system limited but it more closely offer frame rates that is closer to actual frame rates you'll see when you're playing the entire game. Confirming our conclusion, results from 1280 x 1024 with AA and AF is the point where we began to see a difference between the four cards. However, this time the higher clocked Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme can't even come close to the frame rates we're seeing on the GeForce 7950GT, though both are still faster than the ASUS EN7900GS by a slight margin - 3 to 4 fps on both minimum and average fps. With near 30 fps frame rates, that difference may be noticeable at times, though your mileage may vary.

At 1600 x 1200, only the GeForce 7950GT have enough pixel processing power to keep you from dropping below 30 fps. While it may seem disappointing, it's not. With any GeForce 7900GS, you'll be able to play at comfortable frame rates at 1280 x 1024 with AA and AF - maintaining more than 30 fps minimum. That's actually great news, particularly from a card that's selling for about USD 200, slightly more for the higher clocked cards.


Even at 1024 x 768 without AA and AF we can already see signs of a difference between these cards, particularly between the GeForce 7900GS cards and the GeForce 7950GT. The difference persist all the way up to 1600 x 1200, with absolutely no difference between the GeForce 7900GS cards. Again, it's not until we enable AA and AF at 1280 x 960 do we see a difference between the ASUS EN7900GS and both higher clocked cards, the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme - a 4 to 5 fps difference in minimum and average fps. At 1600 x 1200, the difference is smaller (3 fps), but then again all the GeForce 7900GS cards, higher clocked or not are not able to cope with the burden of this resolution. With little performance separating the GeForce 7900GS cards at 1280 x 960, its hard to justify the higher clocked cards from these results.


Need for Speed: Most Wanted is quite a burden on these cards, so much so that only 2 to 4 fps separates the reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS with the GeForce 7950GT at 1024 x 768 without AA and AF. Both higher clocked cards, the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme claims the middle ground between. At 1280 x 1024, the higher clocked cards are still able to maintain frame rates above 30 fps - 1 fps slower than the GeForce 7950GT. Average frame rates are also not that far off - merely 2 fps slower. With AA and AF, the higher clocked cards are faster by 2 fps than the ASUS EN7900GS and slower than the GeForce 7950GT by 1 to 2 fps. This is really a neck to neck race. At 1280 x 1024 with AA and AF. none of the GeForce 7900GS cards can maintain frame rate above the 30 fps minimum. So the difference between the reference clocked and higher clocked GeForce 7900GS cards only come to play at 1280 x 1024 without AA and AF.


The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion shows how these GeForce 7900GS are just not fast enough for the next generation of games running at full details. For the most part, there results show that you really have to have at least a GeForce 7950GT. The only results from the GeForce 7900GS cards At that point, it's clear that the reference clocked cards, such as the ASUS EN7900GS just don't cut it - average frame rates are below 30 fps while the higher clocked Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme are still fast enough that only minimum frame rates go below 30 fps. While these results seems depressing, remember that Oblivion is an exceptionally heavy on graphics cards. Even a single GeForce 7900GTX have some trouble pushing high enough frame rates in this game.This makes Oblivion the perfect poster game for SLI and Crossfire. We'll see later what a pair of GeForce 7900GS SLI can offer to help frame rates.


There is really nothing we can say to make it better or less painful. The results speak for themselves.

SLI Test

Seeing that in certain cases a single card in not fast enough, we think it would be appropriate to include results from pairing these cards in SLI. With SLI, we theoretically double the pixel processing power, sometimes even beyond what the fastest, currently available single card can offer. The GeForce 7900GS is no exception and in fact is probably the most bang for the buck SLI setup. After all, this is the most affordable GeForce 7900 series of card that still retains a 256 bit memory bus. That and the fact it still have 7 vertex shader units and 5 pixel quads should provide enough pixel processing power for demanding games like F.E.A.R and Oblivion. Naturally, we wonder just how much and if higher clocked cards behave differently - offer more performance - in that regard.

Of course, there are some caveats with SLI, like we mentioned in our past articles (here and here). However, after seeing the results, we think they are useful in that they will be able to teach us that we need to at least double the pixel processing power if we want to run the next generation of games and still maintain high enough frame rate for comfortable gameplay.

We use two configuration for this test. First, we pair up the Gigabyte GeForce 7900GS TurboForce and Leadtek PX7900GS TDH Extreme as the SLI setup for higher clocked GeForce 7900GS cards. Then we switched the Gigabyte card with the reference clocked ASUS EN7900GS and clock down the Leadtek card to reference clocks - an SLI setup of reference clocked GeForce 7900GS cards. Due to the short amount of time we have, we only test F.E.A.R and Oblivion on these setups. After all, these two games are the games in which we found the GeForce 7900GS performance's lacking.

Since this is a special case, the results of these test are not part of our normal evaluation, merely for information only. Here are the results.

F.E.A.R - Performance Test

	SLI 7900GS 450/660		SLI 7900GS 520/700		7900GS		7900GS OC
	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF
1024
Min	39	39	42	39	39	32	38	31
Avg	103.34	95.53	108.93	99.72	91.95	64.94	103.95	74.3
Max	271	251	282	256	219	150	340	280
1280
Min	37	35	37	38	38	25	30	19
Avg	93.19	80.77	103.28	87.09	72.71	46.95	80.59	50.28
Max	249	201	259	223	152	104	314	197
1600
Min	36	33	39	35	29	18	22	14
Avg	78.06	61.15	92.44	66.93	51.31	33.11	58.28	35.19
Max	189	137	233	151	104	70	219	138

F.E.A.R - Afterimage 1

	SLI 7900GS 450/660		SLI 7900GS 520/700		7900GS		7900GS OC
	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF
1024
Min	44	29	52	39	38	25	42	27
Avg	116.07	98.13	124.24	110.62	92.41	64.3	99.99	70.4
Max	310	291	315	292	337	254	252	193
1280
Min	35	26	42	25	31	17	30	23
Avg	98.49	82.48	109.57	90.28	72.33	44.47	79.37	52.68
Max	296	283	295	285	278	180	196	234
1600
Min	29	21	35	24	20	13	25	11
Avg	79.53	62.96	96.13	69.15	50.32	31.12	56.42	34.13
Max	283	228	287	244	203	124	177	118

F.E.A.R - Afterimage 2

	SLI 7900GS 450/660		SLI 7900GS 520/700		7900GS		7900GS OC
	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF
1024
Min	43	42	42	41	34	22	42	27
Avg	97.73	90.74	103.66	94.68	90.29	61.51	99.99	70.4
Max	227	211	228	221	231	170	252	193
1280
Min	42	34	46	35	27	16	30	23
Avg	91.93	84.37	99.6	85.49	70.8	46.09	79.37	52.68
Max	220	207	218	209	182	137	196	234
1600
Min	32	11	31	15	15	9	25	11
Avg	74.51	61.61	90.79	65.3	48.58	31.02	56.42	34.13
Max	195	174	211	195	147	106	177	118

all numbers are in frame rate per second

F.E.A.R is a game that NVIDIA have spent some time perfecting SLI support and the results shows it. In F.E.A.R Performance Test, even the reference clocked GeForce 7900GS SLI setup is able to maintain minimum frame rates above 30 fps at 1600 x 1200 with AA and AF enabled. However, gameplay testing session reveals that you'll want a pair of higher clocked GeForce 7900GS SLI instead - there's at least one instance in the first part of Afterimage where the higher clocked GeForce 7900GS SLI setup offer significantly higher minimum frame rate over the reference clocked GeForce 7900GS SLI. With SLI, we jumped from having playable frame rates only at 1024 x 768 without AA and AF to 1024 x 768 with AA and AF (and in some cases, 1280 x 960 with AA and AF).

Oblivion - Grass Test

	SLI 7900GS 450/660		SLI 7900GS 520/700		7900GS		7900GS OC
	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF	Default	AA AF
1024
Min	36	26	48	36	27	16	29	19
Avg	42	31.98	57.32	43.58	32.64	19.75	34.49	22.4
Max	56	39	67	60	44	29	45	33
1280
Min	17	13	27	20	23	13	27	16
Avg	21.46	17.33	34.94	23.24	26.73	15.52	31.26	18.56
Max	26	21	43	28	37	24	44	27
1600
Min	15	11	23	16	17	9	21	11
Avg	17.47	13.87	27.98	18.11	20.74	11.95	24.39	13.71
Max	20	18	35	21	29	18	35	21

Oblivion - Tree Test