4.0 GPA or 2400 SAT score?

Applying to College
41

<p>Perhaps the MOST IMPORTANT factor for many colleges is not listed here. That is ability to pay.</p>

42

<p>

</p>

<p>you’re an idiot. UCB and UCLA HIGHLY HIGHLY favor gpa over sat score. the latter has a REALLY high chance of getting accepted to ucb or ucla. ucb and ucla don’t really care about test scores as long as you have a high gpa (mind you it can’t be a 1200 or something). why their average is a 2000 is beyond me (my guess is that ucb and ucla are safeties for the ivy rejects who have high sat scores)</p>

43

<p>This question cannot be answered without context, but it’s worth noting that a 2400 is significantly rarer than a 4.0 GPA (only about .01% of the graduating class has the former).</p>

44

<p>

</p>

<p>Because that factor is irrelevant for schools where perfect-scorers are looking at.</p>

45

<p>Oh, how we all wish that ability to pay was irrelevant for people with a 2400…</p>

46

<p>

</p>

<p>I think you misinterpreted aigiqinf’s point.</p>

47

<p>It’s very possible that I did.</p>

48

<p>

A perfect-scorer would likely be wooed by many state colleges with merit scholarships galore. Top schools don’t take one’s ability to pay into account when making admissions decisions, and provide excellent aid.</p>

49

<p>Why not have both?</p>

50

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, there aren’t many people who achieve that.</p>

51

<p>It’s probably more likely that the vast majority of 2400 scorers have > 3.7 GPA’s.</p>

<p>However, a person with a 4.0 GPA may or may not score above 2200.</p>

52

<p>I have a 3.6 and a 2300. I would much rather have a 4.0 and a 2300 than a 3.6 and a 2400.</p>

<p>But in general, 2400’s are probably more eye-popping.</p>

53

<p>I’d say a 3.9/2400 is more impressive than a 4.0/2200.</p>

<p>4.0s are a dime a dozen, but there are only 250 2400s.</p>

54

<p>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ There we go.</p>

<p>250 kids a year get 2400’s. I feel that those people who defend the 4.0 have a severe case of sour grapes.</p>

55

<p>I don’t understand why people are making some type of ultimatum between the two. Regardless, here are my thoughts on the two:</p>

<p>You don’t need to work consistently for four years to get a 2400.
At many schools a 4.0 requires a lot of work.
Grades cannot always measure reasoning.
Grade inflation devalues high GPA’s at many schools.</p>

<p>Also, I find it strange how one-sided this argument is to many people.</p>

56

<p>i’m assuming that this 2400 is single sitting? If not, I’d say 4.0.</p>

<p>I mean, an 800 in CR and math is easily obtainable for most people, its just the grammar that kills you, because the writing is so subjective. </p>

<p>A 4.0 takes work day in and day out, for 4 years (ok, 3 1/2 haha).</p>

57

<p>

</p>

<p>That is an absurd statement.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Do you mean the essay, or the Writing section in general? If it’s the latter, you are mistaken.</p>

58

<p>I feel like anybody who hasn’t gotten both isn’t really qualified to answer. As somebody who has gotten both, I can assure you that I had to hustle much more for the 2400.</p>

59

<p>

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!</p>

<p>You do realize the AVERAGE is in the 500s, right? If it was so easy to get an 800, surely more than <1% would do it, no?</p>

<p>

Did you take it once? Either way, respect. (I’m considering retaking a 2360.)</p>

60

<p>

</p>

<p>He retook a 2380 I believe. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I am currently in a similar situation (GPA could change), and I agree. At very difficult preparatory schools the two may be more comparable, however.</p>