<p>The SAT II's are, like, achievement tests. All you need to do is study for them, learn what knowledge is tested, then do well. SAT I is a measure of the basic skills -- the ability to comprehend nontrivial verbal ideas, the ability to solve nonroutine problems, and one's mastery of the logic and nuances of English grammar. </p>
<p>The SAT I's easier to do well on if you're smart than the SAT II's. But if you're not as smart and willing to work harder, SAT II's are eaiser to do well on.</p>
<p>Ya i originally thought that the SAT IIs were super hard and was as difficult to get 750+ as on the sections on the SAT I...</p>
<p>seems like i was wrong, apparently the curves are very very lenient (like you can get 43/50 and still get 800 on Math II). Also, i heard someone say that a 770 on math II was like the 82nd percentile or something, the 82nd percentile for CR is like 620.</p>
<p>In my opinion, its much harder to study for SAT I (because CR isnt taught in school) than for SAT II</p>
<p>I doubt I can get 2350+ on the SAT I ever in my life. However, I am confident that I can get an 800 on Math II and Chem right now, without even finishing AP Chem because the topics are all based on memorization, not reasoning.</p>
<p>^and to the people that were arguing about awards/SAT...why not have both? Ive wont some big math awards but that doesnt mean that I should just stop and settle for a 2100 on the SAT...if I can get a 2300 on the SAT with national awards/publishing, why not go for it? Sure big time awards are better than standaridized tests, but if you dont even reach a certain level on the SAT, how I can take those awards with credence?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, i heard someone say that a 770 on math II was like the 82nd percentile or something, the 82nd percentile for CR is like 620.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You can't really go by percentiles, because typically stronger students only take SAT-II's, and only in areas they're strong in. Math II does have a notoriously easy curve, but some of them aren't as easy (800 on US history is 99th percentile).</p>
<p>Personally, I would take a 2400 SAT with 2200 SATs strictly for prestige reasons. You can pull out "I got a 2400" at any time rather than "I got three 800's on three subject tests". 95% of the public has no idea about subject tests...</p>
<p>I have pretty much the average of the two, amusingly= 2250 SAT I, 2270 SAT II.</p>
<p>The SAT I is harder to get a 2400 on for two reasons: </p>
<ol>
<li><p>Curve sucks. Yep, it sucks. </p></li>
<li><p>The "2400 determining" problems are hard. Really hard. For math, they require some pretty novel insight; for CR it requires having a keen vocabulary and a knack for reading into things clearly; and for writing, well, those idiom questions can REALLY hurt...</p></li>
</ol>
<p>Math 2 is ridiculously easy if you know your material. It's literally, "ok, this is an identity; that's this formula; another formula; another identity..."; It certainly pales in contrast to SAT math. Same with most other subject tests.</p>