q18
23x+21y=130
you know that x and y have to be integers; the only set of numbers that solves for 130 total price is x=2 and y=4
Therefore B
If you did not know that x and y have to be integers, you were right
BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course
Redeem
Target Test Prep GMAT OnDemand
Scott Woodbury-Stewart’s private virtual classroom — 400 hours of master-class video lessons for the GMAT Focus Edition.
- 715+ score guarantee — highest in the industry (99th percentile)
- 52 chapters · 1,500+ lessons · 4,000+ practice questions
- 400 hours of video · 1,500+ instructor-led HD smartboard lessons
- 300,000+ students accepted to Harvard, Stanford, Wharton, Booth & Sloan & more
- 24/7 live support + weekly Zoom office hours with GMAT instructors
- TTP AI Assist — 24/7 AI-powered virtual tutor for instant help
- 1,200+ flashcards + AI-powered study assistant & daily calendar
- OnDemand, LiveTeach & GMAT Bootcamp formats available
- Also: GRE, SAT Math & Executive Assessment courses
- MBA Admissions Consulting now available
- 🏆 2025 EdTech Breakthrough Award: Test Prep Solution Provider of the Year
- 200,000+ students served
- 5-day free trial — $0 to start, no auto-billing, cancel anytime
★★★★★
5.0
(559 reviews)
130-pt guarantee
$0 to start
then $127/mo
more ds from gmat prep
Source: Beat The GMAT — Data Sufficiency |
q33
1993 1000
1994 1000*(1+x/100)
1995 1000*(1+x/100)*(1+y/100)=1000*(1+x/100+y/100+xy/10000)
(1) not enough
(2) enough so solution is 1000*(1+9.2/100)
1993 1000
1994 1000*(1+x/100)
1995 1000*(1+x/100)*(1+y/100)=1000*(1+x/100+y/100+xy/10000)
(1) not enough
(2) enough so solution is 1000*(1+9.2/100)
q6
(1) alone is not sufficient, does not tell us anything about (u,v)
(2) try to insert number in 1:
could be u=5, r=-4 and v=5, s=-4 i.e not equidistant or
u=2, r=-1 and v=-1, r=2 i.e. equidistant
If you combine that with statement (1) you will see that all pairs are equidistant; just try a couple more numbers
(1) alone is not sufficient, does not tell us anything about (u,v)
(2) try to insert number in 1:
could be u=5, r=-4 and v=5, s=-4 i.e not equidistant or
u=2, r=-1 and v=-1, r=2 i.e. equidistant
If you combine that with statement (1) you will see that all pairs are equidistant; just try a couple more numbers
re: q18
oh, so when I have an unequal # of variables & equations I can guess/plug in as long as I know the variables are integers?
Thats good to know.
thanks
oh, so when I have an unequal # of variables & equations I can guess/plug in as long as I know the variables are integers?
Thats good to know.
thanks
Thank.
Can you explain this part:
how did you go from here:
1995 1000*(1+x/100)*(1+y/100)=1000*(1+x/100+y/100+xy/10000)
TO:
(2) enough so solution is 1000*(1+9.2/100)
Can you explain this part:
how did you go from here:
1995 1000*(1+x/100)*(1+y/100)=1000*(1+x/100+y/100+xy/10000)
TO:
(2) enough so solution is 1000*(1+9.2/100)
1995 1000*(1+x/100)*(1+y/100)=1000*(1+[b]x/100+y/100+xy/10000[/b]) ==> the number in the parenthesis is just multiplying out (1+x/100)*(1+y/100)
Then, you have given x+y+xy/100=9.2 ==> divide by 100 and you get
[b]x/100+y/100+xy/1000=0.092[/b] ==> replace this in the first line and you get
1000*(1+0.092)
Is this clear?
Then, you have given x+y+xy/100=9.2 ==> divide by 100 and you get
[b]x/100+y/100+xy/1000=0.092[/b] ==> replace this in the first line and you get
1000*(1+0.092)
Is this clear?
barely.
let me ask you, if you saw this question on the test, how long will it take you
to work out this explanation? Also, did you see from stmt 2 that it might be sufficient or was it while doing the calculations, that you determined B was sufficient?
Thanks
let me ask you, if you saw this question on the test, how long will it take you
to work out this explanation? Also, did you see from stmt 2 that it might be sufficient or was it while doing the calculations, that you determined B was sufficient?
Thanks



















