<p>As we know, Berkeley and Stanford are one of the top schools in the nation (and maybe one of the top schools in the world) for Computer Science, besides MIT. I want to ask which one of them actually has the best suitable programs if you want to pursue a major in CS with a concentration on software development?</p>
<p>Not sure why you say MIT is any better than Cal or Stanford - I’m pretty sure they’re all on equal footing. Google and US News both rank Cal ahead of Stanford and MIT for “Computer Science” and “Computer Sciences”, while US News ranks Cal #3 (behind the aforementioned two) for “Computer Engineering”. </p>
<p>[Google-based</a> Ranking of Computer Science and Engineering Departments](<a href=“http://pages.cs.wisc.edu/~remzi/rank.html]Google-based”>Google-based Ranking of Computer Science and Engineering Departments)</p>
<p>That’s all I wanted to know. Thanks.</p>
<p>Seriously. I don’t know why the heck people cite the Google-based ranking. It’s useless.</p>
<p>Even I would have to say that Stanford and MIT have stronger CS undergraduate programs.</p>
<p>Stanford, Berkeley, MIT, and CMU have equally top-ranked CS departments, so the professors are of equal intellectual caliber.</p>
<p>But Berkeley has fewer financial resources to dedicate to undergrads, so you have less dedication to teaching, larger class sizes, and relatively fewer research opportunities. Stanford, MIT, and CMU are much better in those areas.</p>
<p>The only catch is that if you don’t qualify for financial aid, Berkeley in-state tuition is going to be a much, much better value for the money than the private schools (which are twice as expensive!)</p>
<p>terenc, that’s a good point. I’m concerned about CMU and it’s location, since California is more of the region where most tech/internet companies are, which (I think) offers better possibilities for internships as well. What do you think?</p>
<p>Also I’m not a cali resident, and of course I’m trying to find as much differences between Stanford, Berkeley and possibly CMU as possible to make my final decisions later on.</p>
<p>^CMU, if I’m not wrong, has Google on one of its campus site. They’re REALLY well-connected.</p>
<p>[Carnegie</a> Mellon Silicon Valley - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carnegie_Mellon_Silicon_Valley]Carnegie”>Carnegie Mellon Silicon Valley - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Sergey Brin and Larry Page, the founders of Google, met at Stanford. So…</p>
<p>KaChow: that is really irrelevant. Brin did his undergrad at the University of Maryland, Page did his undergrad at Michigan. They were PhD students at Stanford. If you’re getting a PhD, Berkeley is just as good as Stanford, MIT, CMU.</p>
<p>CMU Silicon Valley is NOT for undergrads! As an undergrad you will be in Pittsburgh (you may be able to do research in its Silicon Valley location).</p>
<p>From what I have heard, CMU places very well with Google, Facebook, etc… and they all come to recruit for summer internships and full-time jobs. The only reason you should have a concern is if you want to start up your own company while in college, in which case the Pittsburgh location is less ideal than in Silicon Valley; however, this is unlikely for any student, but if it’s your dream, then it’s something to consider.</p>
<p>However, CMU offers more resources in terms of education (it has an entire separate School of Computer Science). Keep in mind you have to apply to a specific school at CMU, though (SCS is harder to get into than other schools at CMU).</p>
<p>Furthermore, there are other concerns to take into account. Weather is one big difference. School culture is another difference (at MIT/CMU you will be around tons of technically-oriented whizzes, Berkeley/Stanford might be more well-rounded - this is just a generalization).</p>
<p>Since you’re out of stater, I would recommend going to CMU/MIT/Stanford over Berkeley, if you don’t mind the weather; but again, this is assuming you even get into CMU/MIT/Stanford (which is not easy at all).</p>
<p>who cares. the fun is at berkeley.</p>
<p>i got into cmu scs and i turned it down for eecs@cal w/ regents 
for a variety of reasons, including money, regent scholar benefits, etc…yea…</p>
<p>Stanford has 6.5% admit rate and MIT about 8+ (will go down further in 2013). So worrying about what to study there is not a big issue until one gets in.</p>
<p>@icecream: If you want “fun,” go to Stanford, which has a less difficult workload than even Berkeley, easier grading.</p>
<p>I agree with texaspg. </p>
<p>GETTING into these colleges is A LOT harder than choosing between them. Don’t be surprised if you don’t get into any of them–that’s how competitive they are. </p>
<p>You would be lucky to get into one of them, to say the least.</p>
<p>@terenc fun does not = easy
i guess we could have different perspectives but jeez if people are considering these schools after they get in, they should choose the school they feel like theyd get the most out of.</p>
<p>Stanford>UCB</p>
<p>So many misconceptions, so little time…</p>
<p>To the OP, all are great for software development. </p>
<p>Google did not “rank” them - those are just Google results, which is more a reflection of the web than of Google’s opinion of them.</p>
<p>CMU is certainly one of the best places for CS, but it isn’t quite on the level of BSM, even if US News says it is. CMU has strength in numbers, hence why its hiring standards for faculty are lower. As a result, its research falls behind BSM, e.g. see the Microsoft database of CS papers,</p>
<p><a href=“http://academic.research.microsoft.com/RankList?entitytype=7&topDomainID=2&subDomainID=0&last=0&start=1&end=100[/url]”>http://academic.research.microsoft.com/RankList?entitytype=7&topDomainID=2&subDomainID=0&last=0&start=1&end=100</a></p>
<p>Notice that it’s actually more productive than Berkeley or Stanford in paper output, but it’s lower-quality research that is less cited. BSM’s H-indices are virtually tied, while CMU’s falls far behind. See the [url=<a href=“http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124721/]NRC[/url”>http://chronicle.com/article/NRC-Rankings-Overview-/124721/]NRC[/url</a>], [url=<a href=“http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/engineering/computer-science]QS[/url”>http://www.topuniversities.com/university-rankings/world-university-rankings/2011/subject-rankings/engineering/computer-science]QS[/url</a>], or [url=<a href=“http://www.shanghairanking.com/SubjectCS2011.html]ARWU[/url”>http://www.shanghairanking.com/SubjectCS2011.html]ARWU[/url</a>] rankings, which show the same. CMU is great, but BSM it is not.</p>
<p>Similarly, CMU Silicon Valley is known for being a failure in terms of what CMU wanted to accomplish. If you’re looking to break into the SV network, Stanford or Berkeley would be far better. The fact that CMU has an entire school of CS doesn’t confer an advantage; it’s primarily an administrative difference, and while there are more faculty who work in the variety of CS subfields, the quality isn’t higher (it’s actually lower). SCS at CMU is also not really like a school in its traditional implementation; it’s two departments with a bunch of institutes. Stanford has CS, SAIL, CSL, EE, etc.; Berkeley has EECS, ICSI, etc.; MIT has EECS, CSAIL, etc. It’s just administratively different.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There isn’t any evidence that the workload in CS at Stanford is any less than elsewhere, or that its grading is easier. I haven’t seen any such data and as far as I can see, the workload in Stanford CS is equal to or greater than elsewhere (e.g. the intro CS sequence at Berkeley is taken in 1.5 years, while at Stanford it’s taken over 1 year, and covers all the same material).</p>
<p>It’s a though decision, I guess. But I actually like a more balanced academic environment and something more interactive, (hope I’m not breaking through the clouds, lol), - does that mean Stanford would be a better choice, (well, of course if I’d get in)?</p>
<p>^I would say that either Berkeley or Stanford offer a more balanced academic environment. Good luck getting into either, though.</p>
<p>I strongly disagree with phantasmagoric.</p>
<p>These two sites prove that generally Stanford has more lax grading than Berkeley, a GPA difference of 0.31 in 2005:
[Stanford[/url</a>]
[url=<a href=“http://gradeinflation.com/Ucberkeley.html]UC-Berkeley[/url”>UC-Berkeley]UC-Berkeley[/url</a>]</p>
<p>Another piece of evidence is the fact that at Stanford an A+ is a 4.3, and at Berkeley an A+ is just a 4.0.</p>
<p>This article from the Stanford Review claims that only a few Stanford Engineering classes have an average grade lower than a B+:
[url=<a href=“http://stanfordreview.org/article/grade-inflation-must-go/]Grade”>http://stanfordreview.org/article/grade-inflation-must-go/]Grade</a> Inflation Must Go](<a href=“http://gradeinflation.com/Stanford.html]Stanford[/url”>Stanford)
Meanwhile, these are the Berkeley EECS grading guidelines, which state that the average lower division GPA should be in the range of 2.5-2.9 and for upper division it should be in the range of a 2.7-3.1 (my guess is that it falls in the upper range, which is still a C+/B- average):
[Grading</a> Guidelines for Undergraduate Courses | EECS at UC Berkeley](<a href=“http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Policies/ugrad.grading.shtml]Grading”>Grading Guidelines for Undergraduate Courses | EECS at UC Berkeley)</p>
<p>Anecdotal evidence supports this:
A friend of mine at Berkeley told me how a professor who had taught at both Stanford and Berkeley admitted that people getting B’s at Berkeley would have gotten A’s at Stanford (presumably, A-'s?).
Family relations, who are Stanford alumni, also tell me, anecdotally, that the Stanford workload is less.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that this is all relative. I spoke to another friend from Berkeley, and he told me that as long as you put in the time for the CS projects, and have some aptitude, you will get a good grade.</p>
<p>^What if Berkeley is trying to weed out every tom, dick and harry wanting to do CS in a top 5 school even if they are not good enough?</p>