University of Washington vs. UC Berkeley

Berkeley is much better for engineering (as you know). Depends on your financial situation, but my vote's for Cal.

At Berkeley, you have more opportunities with internships since it right in Silicon Valley. Berkeley CS is highly respected among the CS industry because of its rigorousness. I had a friend that went to Washington, his opportunities were limited.

EECS will kill your GPA most likely...but if you do well, maybe take 5 years and double major in biz admin, you'll average up the GPA if you work hard. Either way will position you better for quantitative/algorithm trading. Why computer science if you want to go IBD?

But if you love comp sci, go for it. If you file as an independent, I believe you can change your residency to California after a year. Then bam, in state tuition.

Recruiting won't be quite as good as Haas, but pretty much. You'll just have to be more proactive about finding out when things are happening because the business school makes sure the kids there know when an opportunity is coming up.

Thanks for the replies, they were very informative. I disagree with the UW jobs thing though, cause I know for a fact that UW CS has sicker than sick job ops but it is way more limited than Berkeley in terms of finance/consulting.

I might actually consider the berkeley out of state tuition -> independent in-state tuition route. Do you guys know if the top IB's recruit for their NY jobs from Berkeley? I heard it might be limited to SF/LA in which case I don't think it would be worth it.

If you want to do banking, Berkeley is the clear choice.

Berkeley is as much an investment banking analyst factory as Wharton and Stern are. The various business frats (AKPsi, BAPsi and DSPi) on campus have plenty of resources and mentor connections that groom you for investment banking interviews. Haas in particular is a shark tank full of hyper-competitive IBD hopefuls who cross paths with each other multiple times at the same superdays and who nag each other constantly regarding whether they've heard offer/reject decisions from each bank. It's that kind of environment and it sufficiently prepares you for IBD.

I have both friends who are CS majors and some who are business majors from UW. The CS majors landed at great TECH companies. They tell me that it is extremely rare for anyone there, regardless of major, to make it into investment banking. One student every two or three years gets into a bulge bracket bank. The one or two who get in each year usually end up at some real shitty local boutiques. The bschool in general does a bad job of teaching students "The Game" (what sort of career options are out there and how to prepare oneself for them). As a result, the majority of students think investment banking is "managing people's money." It's more of a Big 4 and IT consulting factory.

The typical New York investment banker only knows of four West Coast Schools: Berkeley, Stanford, UCLA and USC. In his mind, all others in that region are irrelevant. Very few (definitely less than five) shitty to somewhat decent boutiques recruit at UW, and they don't do it consistently. I had to contain my laughter when my friend got excited that Goldman Sachs was recruiting there. He showed me the job description and I nearly spat my food out when I realized that it was for ops in Salt Lake City.

Unless Washington carries a significant financial advantage or you absolutely love their campus, you probably want to study CS at Berkeley (duh).

Edit: Ouch, $54K/year is more expensive than MIT or CMU- didn't know it was that bad. Without any financial aid, you're going to graduate with $125K less debt at UW. Ironically, this level of cost-difference makes #6 UW the new no-brainer.

But if you can get into Berkeley, you should be able to get into MIT, Cornell, or CMU as a transfer student, and a year spent at #6 UW will save you $30K and will not hurt your CS education very much. All of the top ten schools (aside from Princeton which really only gets there because of selectivity rather than rigor of the curriculum) have roughly the same CS curriculum and schedule. First year, plan on taking discrete math/ intro to CS theory, linear algebra, basic object-oriented programming (Comp Sci AP course), Calc III, and Newtonian physics. Make sure you maintain a 3.6 GPA in Engineering.

70% chance you can transfer to CMU or MIT after a year if you do that. 60% chance you can do that- if you follow my curriculum- without setting back your graduation. You may need to retake a few final exams at MIT or CMU.

If you get a >3.6 GPA from Berkeley considering you stick with EECS with good boutique exp. you will easily get interviews with most/all of the BB's. Make sure you join some business clubs in Berkeley (DSP, BAP...) they can really help with nailing the interviews.

Absolutely, but if OP really wants to be on the East Coast, his odds will be a little better out of CMU or MIT.

1.) CMU and MIT are just as good at Comp Sci. 2.) CMU and MIT are private schools with better career counselors and also with more rich kids aware of banking. 3.) This is key it does not require a very expensive plane flight to get you to an on-site interview.

If Berkeley cost $30-35K/year like most public schools, I'd be advocating for Berkeley, too- and it certainly makes a lot of sense in-state. But since it costs more than CMU and MIT for an out-of-state student, I really think UW for a year and then transfer to MIT/CMU is the best choice. If OP can get into Berkeley for CS but cannot get into CMU and MIT, that will be a big surprise.

Berkeley, Berkeley, Berkeley.

Being surrounded by other competitive kids will only better prepare you for the real world. UCB DSP is a banking machine that cranks out and places BB bankers like a factory. And like someone said earlier, after a year at Berkeley, apply for California residency. I saw Berkeley kids at every single one of my LA, SF and NYC superdays.

Also something very important to consider is the location of your school. How many finance companies have large satellite offices near UW? How many have such offices in SF? You will have access to much better and more prestigious internships during your four years at Berkeley. Do not underestimate how much that will help you in the long run.

In my opinion weighing your costs/benefits, UCB is absolutely worth the price of admission.

$54K/year is worth it? OP will graduate $200K in debt. At 7.5% interest, he will owe more on the debt service on his student loans than he will on rent when he moves to NYC.

I had to make a very similar decision to the OP's several years ago. I could either choose CMU (#1 CS school) or in-state (#5 CS school). The cost difference was only $30K/year back then. It was the bottom of the tech crash and CMU grads were working at McDonald's, owing all of this money in student loans, rather than working as programmers.

So I went in-state instead. Best choice I ever made; wound up in the same spot I would have had I gone to MIT and graduating debt-free rather than $100K in the hoc for loans that can never be discharged in bankruptcy.

If I had to do everything over again, I would have gone in-state for a year and then applied for a transfer to MIT.

Berkeley is a great value at $30-35K/year like most state schools would cost an out-of-state resident. However, it is a poor value at $54K/year when you will be placed into lecture halls of 300 students and have TAs that do not speak English. You might as well save some money and go to a private engineering school like CMU or MIT where the instructor quality tends to be higher.

Go to UW for a year, then transfer to MIT. Save yourself $60K and get a better education. Berkeley grads are excellent programmers simply based on the impossibly hard exams that they had to pass in spite of the education they got. What remains unsaid, however, is that about 25% of the students at top engineering schools drop out or switch majors before graduating. So would you want to spend $200K on an anthropology degree? Dropouts/major switches are less common at the private engineering schools.

It is a shame that they want $54K/year for Berkeley. If they lowered it to $30K/year for out of state kids, you'd need a three inch hole in your head to go to MIT instead of Cal. But given that it's more expensive than MIT and MIT is on the east coast, you need to pick UW and transfer to either CMU or MIT after a year.

Graduating $200K in debt sucks. Graduating $200K in debt into a weak jobs market sucks even more. Graduating $200K in debt if you wind up working at Microsoft anyways (which hires more programmers from UW than Cal) is something that you'll be kicking yourself for a decade for.

thanks for the advice, I realize Berkeley is the only option I have if I want a career in IBD. Also UW Business is a joke, I wouldn't consider it for my life.

Transferring to MIT/CMU is a good idea, but remember it's INSANELY hard to transfer into MIT, CMU might be a bit easier. I may consider Berkeley if I can figure out a way to change my residency status to in-state within a year.

Yes. If you can get in-state tuition at Berkeley, that is the perfect solution. Do you have any aunts or uncles who live in CA?

sadly no I don't and I hear you need someplace to live in order to change your residency easily. if i can figure out a solid way to do this, most likely I'll head to Berkeley. If not, screw it, I can make close to 100k if I get into a top tech job out of UW, and then I'll apply to business school. I'll also consider transferring.

Wise move. $16K/year for the #6 CS school vs. $54K/year for the #1 CS school when they have similar curriculums and tech recruitment in undergrad is a pretty darned easy choice. There are some differences in graduation rates and wall street recruitment, but when it comes to tech recruitment, the top ten CS schools are pretty much all in the same camp. A 3.7 from UW will not look that much different than a 3.7 from MIT to a recruiter at Google or Microsoft, or for that matter, an intelligent hiring manager in quant development or algorithmic trading on Wall Street. The real question is how well you can code and whether you can solve the problem in O(n log n) time. That's primarily a function of your innate problem solving ability- it's just that a top ten CS program is going to give you the tools- to be able to solve the tough interview problems- and the tough architecture problems you'll face if you wind up as a programmer.

I would also recommend considering a financial engineering MS in addition to considering an MBA. Your background in CS will give you a lot of strength for that degree and a top five program (Chicago, Cornell, CMU, Princeton, Columbia) will probably land you a job as a quant on Wall Street. But it's a very math heavy program, and you'll need to excel in math. That means making it through at least Calc III, Diffy'Qs, Probability-based calculus, and linear algebra and perhaps doing real analysis. That really sets the foundation for a financial mathematics/financial engineering degree.

yep thanks for the advice I will consider financial engineering as well. why would real analysis be required for it? I heard it's insanely hard and I'm not too interested in taking it anyway. I was considering doubling in math until I saw multiple real analysis courses on the required list for most schools.

Just to add to the topic of in state residency. If this will help you gain one year status before the UCB financial aid registration deadline I highly suggest you do this. You can rent a really cheap spot somewhere in Norcal right now, and not necessarily have to live there. Find something in the $500-800 range, sign a short term or month by month lease. I know at UCB you have to live on campus the first year so just cancel your lease once school starts. The cost of such a plan ( April - August: 4 months X $800 = $3200) is much less than the one year difference between out of state and in-state tuition at UCB (54k - 30k = 24k).

Just something to consider. Best of luck with your decision.

@kuf135 thanks for the tips, I will further research it to see if it can work out. I've heard Berkeley has made further changes to their policy to prevent OOS students from paying in-state tuition.

@illiniprogrammer thanks again, i'll see how my interest in math goes. if i may ask, how did things work out for you after doing CS at your state school?

Just throwing it out there, contrary to popular urban myth about the outsourcing of CS jobs (I usually want to smack someone when they say that), CS majors generally enjoy the highest salaries and most job security out of all the majors in their respective schools. The reason I'm doing CS rather than business/finance/econ/history/under-water basket weaving is that I think it's an interesting, rigorous & practical education. Anyways engineering/CS is a must if you go to a non-target and if you have hope of success in life.

Let the kid finish 1st year, before you start telling them to get a MS and MBA resulting in opening their own firm.

UW and the cheaper tuition seem like the smart move, you should not solely goto a school having a goal to be in banking, no school guarantees that so that kind of thinking makes little sense.

IP, the reason they kept you is because your salary is cheap compared to your production. Developers/research/desk analysts are cheap its the traders that are expensive and need to be cut when the firm underperforms.

WSO is overtaking College Confidential.

You're middle office. Traders are front office. kthxbai

yes I realize if I go to UW i will not get an investment banking job. However, I'm wondering if Berkeley is worth it considering I can make the about the same money coming out of UW (remember I got into CS and it's a top 10 CS school) having paid less than 1/3 of the tuition.

everyone and their sister has a degree in business. I'd rather do something challenging and useful.

also, why are we lowering the role of quants here? aren't they the backbone of investment firms? all investment bankers do are mindlessly implement the models that quants create. I've also heard they get paid quite a bit of money.

Well, we've got some pretty smart traders who pull their own weight. But the market is really strong for quants who are really strong programmers.

yes I realize if I go to UW i will not get an investment banking job. However, I'm wondering if Berkeley is worth it considering I can make the about the same money coming out of UW (remember I got into CS and it's a top 10 CS school) having paid less than 1/3 of the tuition.

everyone and their sister has a degree in business. I'd rather do something challenging and useful.

I personally would find getting $200K into debt that can never be forgiven an unacceptable risk, but if the OP is a risk-taker, UC Berkeley makes a lot of sense. But in reality, if I had to do everything all over again, I would have transferred to CMU, Cornell, or MIT after two years.

not worth the debt ATＡＬＬ．

the numbers won't diverge if I go to business school. I've heard of some UW CS kids going to top business schools later on and making bank. but I'm still lured by the sense of opportunity at Berkeley. It's still only a state school though..

I goto Berkeley. Non-Haas. That's being said Haas gets you ready and puts you in a great position to get into IB. Doing engineering with GPA above 3.0-3.2 with something finance related work experience wise will get you interviews at pretty much every BB. It also helps that alot of the tech groups sit in SF and alot of ex-engineers are in senior positions. For that matter, I wasn't Haas but got plenty of BB interviews and will be joining one soon. Because Haas is a target it allows for anyone with a solid and relevant resume to get interviews.

I know alot of people who also do double majors with Haas and Econ/stats/engineering.

I wasn't in a business frat but they do get their kids placed well: http://www.dsp-rho.com/Brothers-CareersInternships.html Look at 2006-2008

That being said the price tag for out of state is absurd and only going to keep rising with the states current budget crisis. It is very possible to get in-state within a year. Also do you qualify for fin aid because they do give out a reasonable amount of grants. You can easily get out of having to live freshman year in the dorms by showing financial hardship. One of my best friends was from Washington and finance-wise we compared the UW job board to ours and it's not really comparison...they only have back/middle office postings. We have every BB and every prestigious boutique does on-campus here. Plus if you do EECS and have a high gpa you will have basically any quant position available as many quant funds and prop shops recruit here for the heavy math/stat guys.

Hope that's helps. I'm out of state but I was lucky my parents could afford it. I don't ever regret the decision. Bay area is awesome.

Kid, make up your fucking mind. If you want to do banking or consulting, go to Berkeley. If you want land a tech job, go to UW and save some money.

We've already offered you enough damn advice on which school you should attend if you want to do banking. But you keep expressing this desire to do CS, as well as a desire to just make bank regardless of what career path you take.

Do you want to do banking? Do you want to get a tech job? Do you just want to make bank?

Make up your damn mind.

I'm a big proponent of Washington. Berk program kids I've met haven't been very strong. They also place poorly for east coast, U Washington fares better for NY.

Go to Berkeley. Try to get in-state tuition. Pay off the loans after you make it into banking. Profit.

Here's an idea I haven't seen mentioned in this thread: go to a California Community College for 2 years, then transfer. After 2 years in Ca, you will have residency and qualify for that sweet in state tuition. More info in: //www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/iu-or-cc-berkeley

Transferring from a CC, you are basically guaranteed to get in at UCB (Can be directly admitted to Haas and EECS) or UCLA. USC, UCSD, and UCSB (not a target, but it would be the kickass way to spend 2 years) are all good backups.

You will get out with comparatively minimal debt, and be in a much stronger position than UWash. Don't get me wrong, their CS program is very elite, but the many wall street guys will see "random state school".

IS ANYONE ELSE READING ILLINOISPROGRAMMER POSTS?

I FEEL LIKE I'M TAKING CRAZY PILLS NO ONE NOTICES HOW HORRIBLE THIS MIDDLE AGED BACK OFFICE LOSER CONSTANTLY TROLLS FOR COMP SCI AND STATE SCHOOLS AND MID OFFICE RISK?

LOL @ THIS GUY

Cal. EECS. You will open up your career choices.

You might be able to innovate your way into a start up and become the next DST, Peter Thiel, Marc Anderseen, or those Paypal Mafias. Those are the exit roles for some bankers.

Or maybe you can create the next Facebook and have bankers lick your balls to take you public.

Or maybe you will be able to join a start-up and exit with couple millions in your pocket to seed a VC fund.

Or at the worst case go into IBD and enjoy the same grueling long hours as working for a start-up. And find out after 5 years, your exit is at a VC firm.

UW CS? That's junk. You might as well go to school at Siberia. Or just brew your own beer at pacific northwest.

Eh, UW is #6 in CS; it does better in that subject than any Ivy. Why not just make it easy on yourself, go to UW, land at Amazon or Microsoft, spend a few years there, enjoy playing D&D and Shadowrun with your friends, and then land at Jump or Getco where you'll be in good company as a mildly nerdy CS major?

There was a significant culture shock coming from Chicago to New York. Seattle or Berkeley vs. NYC is going to be huge. This is a city where pedestrians get honked at and run over when they're the ones wih the right-of-way, and you are liable to get a parking ticket when you are sitting in the driver's seat of your car with the engine running. It's one thing to have the opportunity to work on Wall Street- it's another thing to be forced to because of student debt which will take several years to pay off.

yea i know ur jelly of my megafund.

enjoy ur crap midwest back office job.

here's my advice: go to cal, go in debt, get high grades, get a job in ibd, pay off debt, get a job in pe, build up money, get an mba from H/S/W, pay for that with the money you built up to some extent and go more in debt, get another job in pe, pay off debt immediately, be loaded by the age of 35, marry a super hot blonde chick with large knockers, make md at 42, leave to start your own fund at 48, become a PE legend and billionaire at 60, bring your 25 year old rockstar harvard grad son into the business (name him Prescott, Charles, Remington or something else pretentious), retire at 70 as a world famous investor, write an investment manual, die and leave billions in trust for your family --- knowing before you're gone that you've create another great american empire.

life is very, very simple.

Do you want to bang granola hippies (Washington) or beach babes (Berkeley)?

so as a conclusion to this thread (unless you guys want to make it any bigger), this is what I've gotten out of it:

I could pussy out and choose UW and not make it into IBD or I could be a baller (and possibly a retard) and choose Berkeley and try to make it into IBD.

honestly it doesn't fucking matter

just looking at the SA list this year for my bank, there are about 30 schools represented, of which Cornell, Georgetown, Harvard, Princeton, and Wharton have the highest representation. However, there are many top liberal arts schools represented and other schools in the US News ranking 50-100 range.

Doesn't make sense to put yourself into debt. Go to udub. Do well. Get a good job. And please dont get me started about how all state schools suck, cuz they don't.