UCB Meng or any at all

[u/Ok_Release2379]

I am planning on doing a 1 year masters (with possibly a few exceptions) post my 4 year BS in computer engineering at purdue. I was wondering out of these options which is the best for me negating price (I will have saved up money, or receive full financial aid like I am now, fully willing to pay for better choice).

Also key things to note, I am a 3.99 GPA junior who has internships at two big tech companies and will return to 1 hopefully. If everything goes to plan, I really don’t see why I shouldn’t be able to at least get a job there if not at quant finance. I am a student focused on computer architecture. I care about research opps only for learning but not at all for post academia because I def plan to do industry engineering. I will have already done most of computer architecture courses at Purdue by my bachelors and also want a big name boost for big tech asic design and quant finance fpga (already interviewed for a few firms and think I can land one even with purdue, but just to make my life easier). Again, consider all of this when people say some degrees are too short. I’m really just doing a masters to boost my resume not for job search but for starting salary and opportunities down the line. Also if you recognize me from this don’t dox lol. I’ll list everything in the order I believe they should be considered:

1 year UCB Meng EECS (is Meng worse than MS as seen by industry? Ik kind of a dumb question)

1 Year Cornell Meng ECE

1 year (4+1) MS Purdue ECE

1.5 ish year Stanford MS

1.5 year CMU MS

1 Year Umich Meng

No masters at all for a career in computer architecture (pref design or architecture or quant fpga)

Those are all of my options^^^. Any other Masters program I’m forgetting or should consider??? Also lmk if my timelines are incorrect above

Oh also if I do get research and write good essays, how hard is it to get into these programs considering rest of my profile. Ik research not too important for coursework only

Thanks and I hope my prestige chasing is more understandable than pretentious. Also I would have already taken the most important ECE masters courses offered at purdue.

Edit: huge thing that pertains to the option of no masters degree at all. Does prestige not mean much for moving around big tech or going to quant finance after work experience? Does a masters not mean much for moving around big tech or going to quant after work experience? How hard will it be to promote in either industry? Answer this in the context of ASIC vs. FPGA (kind of already expect fpga to be more lenient)

[u/zacce]

First, if I were you, I'd not consider MS. You said you can land quant FPGA.

Second, if MS is a must and money is a non-issue, then 1.5 yr Stanford from your options.

[u/Ok_Release2379 → u/[deleted]]

Atp I would have already designed the standard risc v multicore. While OOO is cool, I know Berkeley offers many courses in codesign and modeling and things alike. I prob won’t even work in cpu core logic either (just because of probability, I find it very cool it’s just there are more roles in asic all combined than OOO specifically and to be honest, I really don’t mind either). Now one question, do you know if I’d be able to design the OOO processor in a masters course, or would I have to go down to undergrad comp arch there to design it? At the point it makes no sense

[u/megafireguy6]

For quant, yes prestige does matter but CompE at Purdue is sufficient, the fact that you’re getting interviews at various firms is proof of that. A masters won’t really help you much more there.

As for moving around big tech, you already have 2 internships at big tech companies and Purdue is a good enough school to get past ATS filters at every big tech company as well as get noticed by many recruiters.

Only reason I’d get a masters in your shoes is if you wanted to do IC design and your return offer from the big tech company is not IC design, those roles are usually for MS and PhD graduates. In that case I would shoot for Stanford or CMU. MEng at UCB is closer to a CS degree than an ECE degree, it’s a little weird. Others are nice but if you’re going to a big prestige bump, Stanford and CMU are the only ones that will provide it. Maybe Cornell as well but they don’t seem to be as well known for ASIC design

[u/Ok_Release2379 → u/megafireguy6]

So if I start in asic design, then it’s okay just to skip the masters. You don’t think it’d hurt pay, promotions, or moving around?

Both of my big tech internships are good, one DV, one design. I would love to return to the design one. If that is the case post-grad, would you j say skip masters because my TC wouldn’t be different by too much? If I can get a masters salary with a bachelors after 1-2 years of working with no repercussions involving promotions, versatility, and pay later then I agree. Thanks for the response.

As for quant, I do think purdue is sufficient but not the best. I also think that if I work some years in big tech school would matter less and the transition to quant will be easier

[u/AnImmortalParadox]

I was EE at purdue and went to UCB for the MEng. I had a good experience at Cal, but my focus was Analog IC so I can’t speak to the comp arch track too much. Berkeley is basically the promised land for VLSI, so that’s why I decided to go. I was also pretty fortunate to get a job within a few months of starting my master’s so that’s a caveat. The MEng is functionally the same as a coursework MS, except the MEng has a project component that is built into the coursework structure. Tbh if you can get a job with a BSCmpE from Purdue, and have your company pay for a part time master’s, that might be the best option. You maximize earnings while getting a grad degree in the process. Only drawback is it’s a lot of work and time. All the options you listed are solid, just be judicious and pick the program that allows you to do what you want to do.