Hi! I’m a CS student from Texas who’s looking for advice about which school to decide on.
UT Austin is ~32k/yr (in-state), UC Berkeley is ~84k/yr, Northwestern is ~97k/yr, and Duke is ~98k/yr. My parents are willing to cover all scenarios (no loans, etc.), but the cost differential is still pretty substantial (and it makes me feel personally a bit weird opting for a more expensive option given the relative accessibility of my state school).
I’m not 100% certain about my post-graduation goals, but I either plan to enter industry (big tech, startup) or focus primarily on research and potentially enter academia.
Currently, Berkeley is my top choice given the access to research opportunities, proximity to Silicon Valley (I have a relative there), and overall quality of its EECS program (also its reputation as one of the Big 4). I know UT Austin’s CS department is also pretty solid, but I’m unsure if I would get a similar experience as with Berkeley. I also included Northwestern/Duke since they’re top schools but not exactly known for CS (and I’m less acquainted with them overall).
In terms of preference, some of my considerations are a technical/rigorous education, research/internship opportunities, and mostly good weather (as someone from Texas but it really doesn’t matter lol). I’m also partial to smaller class sizes, but having a large class might be unavoidable at a big public university, especially given the popularity of CS.
Overall, I’m just wondering whether some of the pros mentioned above justify the steep cost differential between my options (so far my family and I are leaning towards yes). Any input is appreciated!
Really depends what type of undergraduate experience you want. Berkeley is a large state school, so probably not much attention or advising. Plus, living off campus. With a mid size private, you’ll have a much more intimate residential experience with your classmates.
Anyway, my 1560 SAT (one take at age 14), 4.6 GPA CS/AI/Math triple major is at Purdue honors college and I cant tell you how fast it has gone by. He has loved his time at Purdue, though currently studying abroad in Europe, which maybe he loves even more. Just to say, 4 years will be shorter than you think.
That said, I would pick UT Austin. You will save $200K (invested grow to $300) and it sounds like your parents can bankroll that for either 1. a future start up, or 2. grad school. If you got into these schools as undergrad, you will likely do well in the grad round and once you got to grad school, people care a lot less about your UG.
UT Austin is #7 for CS; I mean this is really crazy not to pick it. I will not bore with you with stories of kids coming out of top 5 schools in other majors without jobs this year. There are no guarantees. Plus, you’d be going to to a top school, so there is zero argument to spend the money on UG. Do UTA and then do grad school at Berkley or Standford. They obviously like you and that is a much surer path to industry than UG.
Congrats; they surely liked your profile. My advice stands. 300K post taxes, compounded is at least a half million. That will be some nice seed money if you keep your eyes above the horizon, get involved in research, and look for opportunities. Youre parents are awesome for leaving this decision up to you, but the smart money is on UT.
If you ask people on CC if the difference in $X is worth it, they will apply their unique financial situation to making the decision, and you will get a range of opinions. For some families, that amount is nothing at all, for others it’s a moderate hardship, and for the rest it’s insurmountable. I personally think you should ignore all of those opinions, because we don’t know your parent’s financial situation and how much of a hardship that extra $208K will be for them.
Does Berkeley have better CS opportunities? The answer is clearly yes. Most of that advantage has to do with it being one of the top CS universities in Silicon Valley. Some of your professors will be involved in startups, some of your fellow students will create successful startups, and many of your fellow students will end up in positions with FAANGs or lesser known but solid companies. It’s the ultimate breeding ground for new ideas. And when it’s time to visit companies, they are just a BART or UBER ride away.
And yes, Berkeley also has a better CS program than UT-Austin, but that difference is small. UT-Austin is certainly respected. If you are primarily interested in CS, I think these are the only two you should consider.
Northwestern and Duke allow lots of options if you decide to switch from CS. Perhaps that’s valuable to you, and if so that could be a reason to consider them.
Texas will have as much research as UCB - every school has in fact. Yes, UCB is closer to silicon valley but you think those companies don’t have Texas grads?
OP - This is a hugely underrated advantage at Berkeley. Last semester, my son took 3 upper divs.
Class 1 - Operating Systems - taught by Ian Stoica - founder and chairman of Databricks
Class 2 - Artitificial Intelligence - Pieter Abeel - sold Covariant to Amazon - runs an AI focused VC fund (aix) - John Schulman (OpenAI, Anthropic) and Aravind Srinivas (Perplexity) came from his lab
AIX reached to ask my son to apply to their VC analyst role for last fall, Codeium (an AIX portco) reached out and offered an interview for 2025 summer.
Berkeley EECS will open a TON of doors for you but the cost differential is pretty meaningful too. It’s really up to you - if you are willing to push yourself hard Berkeley will be a far greater experience.
Unless you have been in tech in SV, it’s hard to appreciate just how different the tech environment is there compared to anywhere else. When I moved from there to Boston (the #2 tech center at the time), I was shocked at the difference in opportunities and the relative lethargy of the VCs in Boston compared to those in SV.
So yes, the big tech companies in SV will certainly recruit at UT-Austin, but the smaller innovative companies won’t, given they have a large pool of local talent. The value of Berkeley vs UT-Austin depends upon the goals of the OP.
This may have been an effect of the lack of enforceability of typical employee non-compete agreements in California compared to most other states. Employees can leave their current company to move to another or start a new one immediately rather than have to wait out a period of unemployment due to a non-compete agreement that employers in other states commonly require employees to sign as a condition of employment. (Note: agreements for non-disclosure and non-use of employer proprietary information are legal and enforceable.)
According to LinkedIn, the top 5 employers, in order, of CS grads from UCB are: Google, Amazon, Meta, Apple and Microsoft. The top five, again in order for UT: Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Apple, Meta.
Now reverse engineer that, and look at each companies top school. Google…UCB. Apple…Stanford, Meta…UCB, Amazon…Washington, Microsoft…Washington. Notice a pattern? The schools close to the employer. Are they the best schools? They are all considered good enough. SJSU is Apple’s number three.
As was said before, on a pure ROI basis, Texas is hard to beat. Being closer to SV will present different opportunities though. Only you can decide if that’s worth almost $300,000.
I compare getting a job at the FAANGs as the college equivalent of being admitted to Michigan. It’s a fantastic outcome, and you will be among many smart people.
But just as there more selective colleges than Michigan, there are more selective companies than the FAANGs. UCB allows you to compete more easily for those companies, but succeeding depends upon the talent and drive of the student. That’s the opportunity here for the $208K in additional spend.
I think it comes down to what the OP wants. If you want to work for big tech aka FAANG and adjacent then UT Austin makes perfect sense. But if the OP wants to push themselves harder and have access to unique right tail opportunities then Berkeley makes sense. All depends on whether the OPs parents can truly afford the incremental costs.
Everybody talks about the right tail, but it’s the tail for a reason. The truth is that the vast majority of grads from all of the schools on the list, plus MIT, CMU, and Stanford, work at regular jobs. Just ask the MIT and Stanford grads in my family.
There’s also a myth that all who end up in the tail were educated at the highly rejective schools. Tell that to the founders of NVIDIA who went to Oregon State, RPI and Florida.
The cake is baked. Based on these acceptances, this student will have ample opportunities at any of these schools as long as they make the most of their time.
Well, I guess I heard about a lot of right tail people who graduated from MIT last year. I would estimate that about 100 of them went just into quant. I don’t know how many went into AI specific companies, or went into PhD programs, or created their own startups, all of which I consider right tail events. Given that there are only 1100 students graduating, and perhaps only about half in CS or CS-adjacent jobs, those aren’t bad odds.
In MIT’s most recent survey, it showed that New York was the most common destination, with about 20% of undergraduates going into finance jobs. All the caveats about surveys apply, but it’s consistent with what I heard.
IF your family is wealthy, and the additional cost will have no impact on their retirement or quality of life, then an argument can be made for NW and Duke. If not, UT Austin is a slam dunk.
This might help. Don’t choose based on ranking. Use it as a tool. They at least attempt to use some metrics which seem to weigh research heavily. Play with date ranges. What was popular research 10 years ago is different than today.
UCB and UT are the obvious choices for CS. Do well at UT and I don’t think you would have any career limitations. Good luck.