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.

og ds 127, all math pros needed for this question

Expert replies
by simba12123 » Sun Nov 02, 2008 5:54 am
In the expression, if xn does not equal 0, what is the value of s?

S= (2/n)/((1/x)+(2/3x))

statement 1.) x=2n

statement 2.) n=1/2

qa is a


First must simplify the given equation, which turns into s=6x/5n

so all we need is x and n in order to get value of s.

statement 1.) gives x=2n, which does prove sufficiency. HOWEVER, I am ifyou plug in numbers you will get


case (1) x= 2 n= 1

case (2) x= 6 n= 3

case (3) x= -4 n=-2


If you plug this into the equation s =6x/5n then you will get two answers. Hence insufficient. I can prove statement 1 insufficient by simply plugging in numbers. I am vehemently arguing that this statement only gives a relationship of values. With my plugged in values, I can get different values of S all day long. WHY? LEts shed some light on this!

statement 2 says nothing about x so insufficient

together, sufficient.

using all my careful math and suspicoun of tricks, I believe that I did my best here. Lets not solve this question but lets explain the ambiguity of statement 1. WHat went wrong?
Advancing to be reckoned with!
Join the discussion
Source: — Data Sufficiency |

simba12123 wrote:In the expression, if xn does not equal 0, what is the value of s?

S= (2/n)/((1/x)+(2/3x))

statement 1.) x=2n

statement 2.) n=1/2

qa is a
So as you get simplified expr is s=6x/5n


What do I need to solve this?
value of x and value of n
OR
value of ratio x/n

The stmt A gives me that ratio
x=2n
so x/n = 2
hence suff


First must simplify the given equation, which turns into s=6x/5n

so all we need is x and n in order to get value of s.

statement 1.) gives x=2n, which does prove sufficiency. HOWEVER, I am ifyou plug in numbers you will get


case (1) x= 2 n= 1

case (2) x= 6 n= 3

case (3) x= -4 n=-2


If you plug this into the equation s =6x/5n then you will get two answers. Hence insufficient.
What are the two values you are getting?
Please retry, all will give same value.
You must be doing some calculation mistake

I can prove statement 1 insufficient by simply plugging in numbers. I am vehemently arguing that this statement only gives a relationship of values. With my plugged in values, I can get different values of S all day long. WHY? LEts shed some light on this!

statement 2 says nothing about x so insufficient

together, sufficient.

using all my careful math and suspicoun of tricks, I believe that I did my best here. Lets not solve this question but lets explain the ambiguity of statement 1. WHat went wrong?
Hope its clear now :)
Join the discussion

details

by simba12123 » Sun Nov 02, 2008 10:11 pm
Success is in the details! Thank you folks. THe major takeaway is that an algebraic approach should not be looked over so easily.
Advancing to be reckoned with!
Join the discussion

details

by simba12123 » Mon Nov 03, 2008 5:06 am
Success is in the details! Thank you folks. THe major takeaway is that an algebraic approach should not be looked over so easily.
Advancing to be reckoned with!
Join the discussion