BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

Target Test Prep · GMAT

Choose how you want to prepare

Learn live with an expert or move at your own pace. Every option includes the complete TTP study system.

★★★★★5.0559 reviews
Vote for Target Test Prep, Newsweek Readers’ Choice Awards 2026
NEWSWEEK READERS’ CHOICE 2026

BIG NEWS! Target Test Prep has been nominated, and they’d love your vote!

TTP has worked incredibly hard to build the best test prep experience possible, and winning Newsweek’s 2026 Readers’ Choice Award for Best Test Prep would mean a lot to them. If TTP has helped you, they’d be incredibly grateful for your vote. You can vote once each day through September 9.

Vote for TTP
GMATLiveTeach 7 seats left
Chris Peckover
NEXT LIVE COHORT

Oct 13 to Jan 7, 2027

with Chris Peckover

Schedule
Tue, Thu · 8:00 to 10:00 PM ET
Included
40 live hours + 6 months of GMAT OnDemand
  • Live instruction and real-time questions
  • Class recordings and assigned practice
View class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
EALiveTeach 5 seats left
Logan Thompson
EXECUTIVE ASSESSMENT

Sep 6 to Dec 6, 2026

with Logan Thompson

Schedule
Sun · 9:30 AM to 12:30 PM ET
Included
40 hours of live online classes plus six months of access to the complete TTP EA OnDemand course.
  • 165+ EA Score Guarantee
  • 4,100+ Quant, Verbal, and Integrated Reasoning practice questions
  • 400+ hours of in-depth video lessons
  • 3,000+ step-by-step video solutions
View EA class & enroll
Limited cohort · enrollment openTarget Test Prep
GMATOnDemand Start anytime
SELF-PACED MASTERCLASS

Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand

Complete access from day one. Study on your schedule.

715+ score guarantee
$0to start then $127/mo
  • Personalized study plan and analytics
  • Thousands of lessons and practice questions

Compare the format, schedule, and included access before enrolling. Prices and seat counts shown reflect the supplied offer details.

5 x + 3 y = 17

Expert replies
by sanju09 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 5:14 am
If 5 x + 3 y = 17, what is the value of x?

(1) x is a positive integer.

(2) y = 4 x.


[spoiler]Source: https://gmat.practicetests.teachstreet.com[/spoiler]
The mind is everything. What you think you become. -Lord Buddha



Sanjeev K Saxena
Quantitative Instructor
The Princeton Review - Manya Abroad
Lucknow-226001

www.manyagroup.com
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:33 am
imo B

2 variable requires 2 equations
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Join the discussion

by Gurpinder » Fri Aug 27, 2010 8:39 am
pradeepkaushal9518 wrote:imo B

2 variable requires 2 equations
Hey,

In this case, (B) is sufficient!

However, the rule 2 variables & 2 equations is NOT written in stone. It depends on case-per-case basis. Sometimes you can have 2 equations and still not be able to solve them. So just make sure you confirm that you are able to solve rather than simply look for 2 vars and 2 eq's.


Thanks!
"Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress."
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
Join the discussion

by neerajbansal » Fri Aug 27, 2010 4:11 pm
D in my opinion..The meat of the question is to evaluate the choice A.

When the LCM of the x coeff and the y coeff added with the lowest of two is Greater than the constant, that equation has only one value..

5x+3y=17

lcm(5,3) = 15 add 3 to it...===> 18

18>17

so there is only one solution possible.
Join the discussion

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Fri Aug 27, 2010 7:18 pm
5x+3y=17

x=1 y=4
x=2 y=7/3 ( no where given that y is integer)

do u think 1 is sufficient
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Join the discussion

by Testluv » Sat Aug 28, 2010 1:50 am
However, the rule 2 variables & 2 equations is NOT written in stone. It depends on case-per-case basis. Sometimes you can have 2 equations and still not be able to solve them.
We can't use the n variables and n equations tactic when:

--equations aren't linear
--equations aren't distinct (the so-called "evil-twin" situation)
--we have integers-->this restricts the kinds of values variables can take such that you may have sufficiency even if you have fewer equations than variables

In general, the risk in using the tactic is concluding INSUFFICIENCY. So be careful before you conclude a statement is insufficient when using this tactic. But when concluding SUFFICIENCY, there isn't as much risk.

--------

The question stem provides us with 1 equation and 2 unknowns. Knowing nothing about the properties of the unknowns, we would need an additional equation.

But (1) tells us x is a positive integer. But, as Pradeep showed, y can be a non-integer. It can also be a negative number:

5(4) + 3(-1) = 17

Thus, (1) is insufficient. Eliminate A and D.

(2) provides us with an additional equation. Thus, we have two equations, and two unknowns, and, without solving, we can safely and quickly conclude that (2) is sufficient by itself.

Choose B.
Kaplan Teacher in Toronto
Join the discussion

by pradeepkaushal9518 » Sat Aug 28, 2010 5:11 am
thanks testluv for clearing the confusion.
A SMALL TOWN GUY
Join the discussion

by Gurpinder » Sat Aug 28, 2010 6:41 am
Testluv wrote: We can't use the n variables and n equations tactic when:

--equations aren't linear
--equations aren't distinct (the so-called "evil-twin" situation)
--we have integers-->this restricts the kinds of values variables can take such that you may have sufficiency even if you have fewer equations than variables
Hey,

Could you please clarify the third rule. I get the first 2 but unsure where you are getting at with the third one.

Thank you.
"Do not confuse motion and progress. A rocking horse keeps moving but does not make any progress."
- Alfred A. Montapert, Philosopher.
Join the discussion