Hi dubc1982,

GMATprep is supposed to be just like the real GMAT because it uses real questions from past exams. It's also supposed to be the best indicator as to how well you will do on the real exam. Although I do hear a lot from test takers that the math and verbal is harder but that may just be because they are doing really well (above 700 range).

dubc1982 wrote:I'm taking the GMAT on Saturday and I'm trying to get an idea of how hard people felt it was compared to OG 11, Kaplan Online test and GMATPrep. I'm scoring around 600 on the GMATPrep, which if I could actually get on the real thing would be great.

I also feel like I didn't perform my best on these practice tests, so assuming the actual GMAT is very much the same as the GMATPrep, I think there is no reason for me to get at least 600.

Any input, opinions, advice?

GMATPrep is as close to the actual GMAT as any test. If you scored 600 on GMATPrep, then you should in theory be able to score 600 on the real GMAT. However, taking the real test in a foreign environment will give added pressure and stress for most people. Many people score lower on the real GMAT simply due to the discomfort level and the added stress. So you may score lower--many people in fact have scored lower than their GMATPrep scores. But in theory you should be able to score about the same and in fact a little bit higher than your GMATPrep score.

Good luck.

I concur, the GMATPrep tests tend to be fairly accurate, say, give or take 30 points. If you're scoring 600 on them you can likely expect around that score on the real thing.

I've had students get well below and well above their GMATPRep scores though, so it's no guarantee!

After starting with a few Kaplan practice tests, I just took one of the 2 GMATPrep tests from mba.com, and I have a question about the scoring system on GMATPrep:

I got 25 out of 37 questions right on the quant, and 40 out of 41 right on verbal, and this translated to a score of 780 (q49, v50). Basically, I'm finding it hard to believe that I could have gotten 12 questions wrong on the quant section, and still gotten such a high score. I realize that the test is adaptive, and so one could theoretically have a better hit rate with mostly easy questions, and do worse than someone with a lower hit rate and mostly difficult questions, but 12 wrong and a 780 just doesn't feel right.

Anybody have any insight on this that could help? Thanks very much.