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.

Number properties question

Expert replies
by arvn » Sun Aug 31, 2008 2:35 pm
Can someone please help with the following number properties ds problem:

If x and y are positive integers, what is the remainder when x is divided by y?
(1) When x is divided by 2y, the remainder is 4.
(2) When x+y is divided by y the remainder is 4.
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

Re: Number properties question

by mehravikas » Sun Aug 31, 2008 4:44 pm
I would pick numbers for this problem -

Statement 1 - Let's assume x = 16 and y = 6. Therefore, x / 2y the remainder is 4 and when x / y the remainder is again 4.

x = 24, y = 10.
X / 2y = Remainder is again 4
x / y = Remainder is again 4.

Statement 1 is sufficient.

Statement 2 says (x + y) / y gives a remainder 4.
You can break the above equation as - x/y + y/y

y/y will never leave a remainder. Therefore we can say that when x is divided by y the remainder will be 4.

Statement 2 is also sufficient.

Answer should be 'D'
arvn wrote:Can someone please help with the following number properties ds problem:

If x and y are positive integers, what is the remainder when x is divided by y?
(1) When x is divided by 2y, the remainder is 4.
(2) When x+y is divided by y the remainder is 4.
Join the discussion

by Ian Stewart » Sun Aug 31, 2008 5:32 pm
There's a bit of a trick in this problem, and it illustrates the danger of picking numbers. First, statement 2 is sufficient:

(2) When x+y is divided by y the remainder is 4.

Notice (this will be important when we look at Statement 1) that when you divide by y, the remainder must be less than y, by definition. So if Statement 2 is true, y must be larger than 4. Writing the information in the statement using the standard remainder equation (n = qd + r):

x + y = qy + 4
x = (q-1)y + 4

so x is 4 larger than a multiple of y, and 4 is the remainder when x is divided by y.

(1) When x is divided by 2y, the remainder is 4.

Notice here that the remainder must be less than 2y- that is, 4 < 2y, or y > 2. Writing this statement using the standard remainder equation:

x = 2y*q + 4
x = (2q)*y + 4

So x is 4 larger than a multiple of y. As long as y > 4, then 4 will certainly be the remainder when x is divided by y, and if you test numbers here, and only choose values of y that are larger than 4, you will likely begin to think that 1) is sufficient. It isn't sufficient; if y is equal to 4, for example, then x could be 12. Then the remainder is 4 when x is divided by 2y, but is zero when x is divided by y. Insufficient.
For online GMAT math tutoring, or to buy my higher-level Quant books and problem sets, contact me at ianstewartgmat at gmail.com

ianstewartgmat.com
Join the discussion

by mehravikas » Sun Aug 31, 2008 9:59 pm
Oh yeah, I missed out setting the correct value for statement 1.

Thanks Ian for your help.
Vikas
Ian Stewart wrote:There's a bit of a trick in this problem, and it illustrates the danger of picking numbers. First, statement 2 is sufficient:

(2) When x+y is divided by y the remainder is 4.

Notice (this will be important when we look at Statement 1) that when you divide by y, the remainder must be less than y, by definition. So if Statement 2 is true, y must be larger than 4. Writing the information in the statement using the standard remainder equation (n = qd + r):

x + y = qy + 4
x = (q-1)y + 4

so x is 4 larger than a multiple of y, and 4 is the remainder when x is divided by y.

(1) When x is divided by 2y, the remainder is 4.

Notice here that the remainder must be less than 2y- that is, 4 < 2y, or y > 2. Writing this statement using the standard remainder equation:

x = 2y*q + 4
x = (2q)*y + 4

So x is 4 larger than a multiple of y. As long as y > 4, then 4 will certainly be the remainder when x is divided by y, and if you test numbers here, and only choose values of y that are larger than 4, you will likely begin to think that 1) is sufficient. It isn't sufficient; if y is equal to 4, for example, then x could be 12. Then the remainder is 4 when x is divided by 2y, but is zero when x is divided by y. Insufficient.
Join the discussion

by pepeprepa » Mon Sep 01, 2008 7:14 am
Thank you, nice question
Join the discussion

by arvn » Mon Sep 01, 2008 11:38 am
Thanks Ian!
Join the discussion