compare with VS compared to

[vishalwin]

Hi Instructors,

In GMAT, is there preference of COMPARED WITH over COMPARED TO ?

[vishalwin]

Can anyone please explain this.

[aditya8062]

both are correct and there is no such preference .BUT yes what we should notice is that WHEN we use "compared to OR compared with" the we should not use any other COMPARISON word

[MartyMurray]

Vishal, I am not sure about any such preference on the GMAT but here is the most commonly agreed on difference.

Compared with is used when comparing two things.

When they compare apples with oranges, many people find that they like both.

In his essay, John compared the parties held by ancient Romans with parties held today.

In the article, the newest Japanese cars are compared with the newest German cars, and the conclusions are surprising.

Compare to is used to make the point that one thing is like another. Compare to essentially means the same thing as liken to.

The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.

(The wild parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome.)

I hesitate to compare my own works to those of someone like Dickens.

As I said, I am not sure whether the GMAT sees things that way.

[vishalwin]

Perfect! Marty

btw you know I always prefer compared with in all the questions and they are right (there are always exception so I will find and post those questions also).

May be we can analyze the questions and find if that is the case. but yes your explanation seems good in all conditions.

[DavidG@VeritasPrep]

According to my usage guide, "compared with" can be used to illustrate differences or similarities between two entities, whereas "compared to" is used to illustrate similarities.

Check out this question: https://www.beatthegmat.com/gmat-prep-sc ... 00530.html

(And note that you can use logic to deduce the correct answer without knowing the usage rules.)

[evs.teja]

Compared with is used when comparing two things.

In his essay, John compared the parties held by ancient Romans with parties held today.

Compare to is used to make the point that one thing is like another. Compare to essentially means the same thing as liken to.

The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.

(The wild parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome.)

Marty Sir,
In the sentence quoted in red colour aren't we comparing parties(two things) here as well ?
If I use "with" in the referred sentence , will the sentence be wrong ?
If no, what is the difference in meaning between the the two sentences?

Thanks
Teja

[MartyMurray]

Compared with is used when comparing two things.

In his essay, John compared the parties held by ancient Romans with parties held today.

Compare to is used to make the point that one thing is like another. Compare to essentially means the same thing as liken to.

The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.

(The wild parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome.)

Marty Sir,
In the sentence quoted in red colour aren't we comparing parties(two things) here as well ?
If I use "with" in the referred sentence , will the sentence be wrong ?
If no, what is the difference in meaning between the the two sentences?

Thanks
Teja

If you use with in the referred sentence it will correctly express something different from what it currently expresses.

The wild parties held at the university have been compared to those held in ancient Rome.

means that the parties held at the university have been likened to those held in ancient Rome, as in someone has said something along the lines of "Wow, these parties are a lot like those held back in Roman times.


The wild parties held at the university have been compared with those held in ancient Rome.

means that the similarities and differences between the parties as the university and those held in ancient Rome have been considered or assessed. For instance someone may have noticed that the parties at the university are in some ways wilder than those held in Roman times while the ones held in Roman times involved crazy things that do not go on at the university.

Also, probably one would not use that second version on its own. It makes more sense that it would be part of something along the lines of the following.

The wild parties held at the university have been compared with those held in ancient Rome and have been found to be wilder than the Roman ones.

[evs.teja]

Thank you Marty sir , I did not understand the meaning of likened properly posted in your previous post. So i could not get the intended meaning