<p>
</p>
<p>Ha. USC’s average SAT is the same as Berkeley’s, and USC is the one that superscores. Berkeley’s average UW GPA is a 3.9 and the average W GPA is a 4.3. Berkeley also manages a higher % of students to attend. (Plus, in raw numbers, USC and Berkeley admit about the same #.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hahaha, right. That’s pretty bold to say that one student body is “smarter” than another, especially when the numbers are virtually the same. And especially when the school that’s “dumber” is Berkeley, when everyone knows that Berkeley has mostly extremely brainy students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They’re pretty much the same in diversity. (Berkeley’s Asian population is higher, but it’s also an extremely diverse group in itself.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>USC is an enormous private school. It’s as large as Berkeley.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The SAT score ranges don’t allow such a conclusion. No, 1/4 students did not have below a 1200. The 25th percentiles are 590, 620, 590 (630, 680, 630 superscored), but that doesn’t mean that a quarter of the students in the class got a 590+620+590. It means that a quarter got below a 590 on CR, but probably much, much higher on the other sections (which is why Berkeley would overlook the lower CR score), etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Haha, other than the fact that that’s completely subjective, I think it’s generally acknowledged that Berkeley’s campus is beautiful, being in northern California with tons of trees, right on the Bay. There’s a huge botanical garden on the campus, a creek running through it, etc. and the architecture is very pretty. (Hell, some students who visit Berkeley and Stanford in the same trip have said Berkeley’s campus is prettier.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>How do you even know that? You’ve never gone to either school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’d say Berkeley has some big-time sports, but USC is more of a sporty school (take that as you will).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Sounds like you’re a little bitter from the Cal vs. NU thread. As powergrid1990 said:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Guess you’ll have to deal with it. =)</p>