Last visit was: 19 Nov 2025, 11:55 It is currently 19 Nov 2025, 11:55
Close
GMAT Club Daily Prep
Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History
Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.
Close
Request Expert Reply
Confirm Cancel
User avatar
zisis
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Last visit: 01 Jul 2012
Posts: 122
Own Kudos:
1,724
 [150]
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 122
Kudos: 1,724
 [150]
16
Kudos
Add Kudos
134
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Most Helpful Reply
User avatar
VeritasPrepBrian
User avatar
Veritas Prep Representative
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Last visit: 02 Mar 2022
Posts: 416
Own Kudos:
3,219
 [68]
Given Kudos: 63
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 416
Kudos: 3,219
 [68]
42
Kudos
Add Kudos
26
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,330
 [58]
32
Kudos
Add Kudos
26
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
General Discussion
User avatar
zisis
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Last visit: 01 Jul 2012
Posts: 122
Own Kudos:
1,724
 [2]
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 122
Kudos: 1,724
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
zisis
If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

(1) x > 3!

(2) 15! + 2 ≤ x ≤ 15! + 15

I am sure i ve seen a quesiton like this one before, but tot forgot how to solve it............

If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

Question basically asks: is \(x\) a prime number? If it is, then it won't have a factor \(n\) such that \(1<n<x\) (definition of a prime number).

(1) \(x>3!\) --> \(x\) is more than some number (3!). \(x\) may or may not be a prime. Not sufficient.

(2) \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+15}\) --> \(x\) can not be a prime. For instance if \(x=15!+8=8*(2*3*4*5*6*7*9*10*11*12*13*14*15+1)\), then \(x\) is a multiple of 8, so not a prime. Same for all other numbers in this range: \(x=15!+k\), where \(2\leq{k}\leq{15}\) will definitely be a multiple of \(k\) (as weould be able to factor out \(k\) out of \(15!+k\)). Sufficient.

Answer: B.

I am able to follow until the point that I have highlighted red.......
tried to work your point my self so decided to find if x for 5!+3<x<5!+8 works with your statement above....

so -
\(5! = 120\)
\(5!+3 / 3 = 123 / 3 =41\)correct
\(5!+4 / 4 = 124 / 4 =31\) correct
\(5!+5 / 5 = 125 / 5 =25\) correct
\(5!+6 / 6 = 126 / 6 =21\)correct
\(5!+7 / 7 = 127 / 7 =18.14\)INCORRECT !!!!

so...? what am i doing wrong???
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,330
 [2]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,330
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zisis

I am able to follow until the point that I have highlighted red.......
tried to work your point my self so decided to find if x for 5!+3<x<5!+8 works with your statement above....

so -
\(5! = 120\)
\(5!+3 / 3 = 123 / 3 =41\)correct
\(5!+4 / 4 = 124 / 4 =31\) correct
\(5!+5 / 5 = 125 / 5 =25\) correct
\(5!+6 / 6 = 126 / 6 =21\)correct
\(5!+7 / 7 = 127 / 7 =18.14\)INCORRECT !!!!

so...? what am i doing wrong???

You replaced 15! by 5!. Thus you cannot factor out 7 out of 5!+8 and this is the whole point here.

If you want to check with smaller numbers try \(5!+2\leq{x}\leq{5!+5}\)
User avatar
zisis
Joined: 16 Feb 2010
Last visit: 01 Jul 2012
Posts: 122
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 122
Kudos: 1,724
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
zisis

I am able to follow until the point that I have highlighted red.......
tried to work your point my self so decided to find if x for 5!+3<x<5!+8 works with your statement above....

so -
\(5! = 120\)
\(5!+3 / 3 = 123 / 3 =41\)correct
\(5!+4 / 4 = 124 / 4 =31\) correct
\(5!+5 / 5 = 125 / 5 =25\) correct
\(5!+6 / 6 = 126 / 6 =21\)correct
\(5!+7 / 7 = 127 / 7 =18.14\)INCORRECT !!!!

so...? what am i doing wrong???

You replaced 15! by 5!. Thus you can not factor out 7 out of 5!+8 and this is the whole point here.


did it on excel and seems like you are right.....

15! 15!+x (15!+x)/x
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,003.00 435,891,456,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,004.00 326,918,592,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,005.00 261,534,873,601.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,006.00 217,945,728,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,007.00 186,810,624,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,008.00 163,459,296,001.00

now have to go back and understand how it works.....using the example taht I used (which you mentioned I should use smaller numbers), how do you know when x is too big for a and b, when k!+a<x<k!+b
?
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,330
 [4]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,330
 [4]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
2
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
zisis
Bunuel
zisis

I am able to follow until the point that I have highlighted red.......
tried to work your point my self so decided to find if x for 5!+3<x<5!+8 works with your statement above....

so -
\(5! = 120\)
\(5!+3 / 3 = 123 / 3 =41\)correct
\(5!+4 / 4 = 124 / 4 =31\) correct
\(5!+5 / 5 = 125 / 5 =25\) correct
\(5!+6 / 6 = 126 / 6 =21\)correct
\(5!+7 / 7 = 127 / 7 =18.14\)INCORRECT !!!!

so...? what am i doing wrong???

You replaced 15! by 5!. Thus you can not factor out 7 out of 5!+8 and this is the whole point here.


did it on excel and seems like you are right.....

15! 15!+x (15!+x)/x
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,003.00 435,891,456,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,004.00 326,918,592,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,005.00 261,534,873,601.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,006.00 217,945,728,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,007.00 186,810,624,001.00
1,307,674,368,000.00 1,307,674,368,008.00 163,459,296,001.00

now have to go back and understand how it works.....using the example taht I used (which you mentioned I should use smaller numbers), how do you know when x is too big for a and b, when k!+a<x<k!+b
?

It seems that you don't understand the explanation. No need to check in excel: no integer \(x\) satisfying \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+15}\) will be a prime number.

There are 14 numbers satisfying it:
If \(x=15!+2\) then we can factor out 2, so \(x\) would be multiple of 2, thus not a prime;
If \(x=15!+3\) then we can factor out 3, so \(x\) would be multiple of 3, thus not a prime;
...

If \(x=15!+15\) then we can factor out 15, so \(x\) would be multiple of 15, thus not a prime.

Also 15!+{any multiple of prime less than or equal to 13} also won't be a prime number as we can factor out this prime (15! has all primes less than or equal to 13).

Now, for \(x=15!+1\) or \(x=15!+17\) or \(x=15!+19\) we can not say for sure whether they are primes or not. In fact they are such a huge numbers that without a computer it's very hard and time consuming to varify their primality.

Hope it's clear.
User avatar
NGGMAT
Joined: 20 Oct 2013
Last visit: 26 May 2014
Posts: 37
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 27
Posts: 37
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
good qs!! and explainaton bunnel :) i am stalking you on GMATclub.com
avatar
chalmers15
Joined: 28 Feb 2015
Last visit: 11 Jul 2018
Posts: 1
Own Kudos:
1
 [1]
Posts: 1
Kudos: 1
 [1]
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
zisis
If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

(1) x > 3!

(2) 15! + 2 ≤ x ≤ 15! + 15

I am sure i ve seen a quesiton like this one before, but tot forgot how to solve it............

If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

Question basically asks: is \(x\) a prime number? If it is, then it won't have a factor \(n\) such that \(1<n<x\) (definition of a prime number).

(1) \(x>3!\) --> \(x\) is more than some number (3!). \(x\) may or may not be a prime. Not sufficient.

(2) \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+15}\) --> \(x\) cannot be a prime. For instance if \(x=15!+8=8*(2*3*4*5*6*7*9*10*11*12*13*14*15+1)\), then \(x\) is a multiple of 8, so not a prime. Same for all other numbers in this range: \(x=15!+k\), where \(2\leq{k}\leq{15}\) will definitely be a multiple of \(k\) (as weould be able to factor out \(k\) out of \(15!+k\)). Sufficient.

Answer: B.

Hey Bunuel,

regarding statement 2: Let's say we would add a prime number bigger than 15 to the 15!, e.g. 17. Because it is not possible to factor out 17, the statement is not sufficient, right? Because the result might be prime or not. On the other hand, if we would add 16, we could still factor out 2 and 8 from 15! correct?

Best regards
chalmers15
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,330
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
chalmers15
Bunuel
zisis
If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

(1) x > 3!

(2) 15! + 2 ≤ x ≤ 15! + 15

I am sure i ve seen a quesiton like this one before, but tot forgot how to solve it............

If x is an integer, does x have a factor n such that 1 < n < x?

Question basically asks: is \(x\) a prime number? If it is, then it won't have a factor \(n\) such that \(1<n<x\) (definition of a prime number).

(1) \(x>3!\) --> \(x\) is more than some number (3!). \(x\) may or may not be a prime. Not sufficient.

(2) \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+15}\) --> \(x\) cannot be a prime. For instance if \(x=15!+8=8*(2*3*4*5*6*7*9*10*11*12*13*14*15+1)\), then \(x\) is a multiple of 8, so not a prime. Same for all other numbers in this range: \(x=15!+k\), where \(2\leq{k}\leq{15}\) will definitely be a multiple of \(k\) (as weould be able to factor out \(k\) out of \(15!+k\)). Sufficient.

Answer: B.

Hey Bunuel,

regarding statement 2: Let's say we would add a prime number bigger than 15 to the 15!, e.g. 17. Because it is not possible to factor out 17, the statement is not sufficient, right? Because the result might be prime or not. On the other hand, if we would add 16, we could still factor out 2 and 8 from 15! correct?

Best regards
chalmers15

You are almost right.

Yes, 15! + 16 is not a prime because we can factor out an integer greater than 1 from 15! + 16.
Yes, 15! + 17 might be a prime as well as not. But 15! + 17 is some specific number, so theoretically we could find out whether it's prime or not. If it were a prime, then \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+17}\) would not be sufficient and if it were NOT a prime, then \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+17}\) would be sufficient. Turns out that 15! + 17 is NOT a prime number: 15! + 17 = 1307674368017 = 9157×142805981. So, if (2) were \(15!+2\leq{x}\leq{15!+17}\) it would still be sufficient. But you won't get such number on the GMAT because you'll need a computer to check whether such a large number is a prime (there are some particular values of \(x=n!+1\) for which we can say whether it's a prime or not with help of Wilson's theorem, but again it's out of the scope of GMAT.).
avatar
xiaoxueren
Joined: 05 Aug 2018
Last visit: 01 Jan 2019
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 157
Posts: 5
Kudos: 2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
VeritasPrepBrian
I love this question, so I'll chime in even if only to bump it to the top so more people see it!

Hopefully most can see pretty quickly that x > 3! just means x > 6, and that isn't nearly enough to tell us whether it is prime.


Statement 2 is pretty neat, though: 15! + 2 ≤ x ≤ 15! + 15

Think about 15!. 15! is 15*14*13*12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1, which means that:

15! is a multiple of 2
15! is a multiple of 3
15! is a multiple of 4
etc....
15! is a multiple of 15

Now think about multiples of 2. Every SECOND number is a multiple of 2: 2, 4, 6, 8, 10. You create multiples of 2 by adding 2 to a previous multiple of 2. If a number is even, adding 2 "keeps it" even.

The same holds for 3. Every THIRD number (3, 6, 9, 12, 15, 18) is a multiple of 3. If you have a multiple of 3 and add 3 to it, it's still a multiple of 3.

This will hold for all of these numbers - because 15! is a multiple of every number between 2 and 15, then adding any number in that range of 2-15 will ensure that the new number remains a multiple of that number, and the new number will not be prime.

Therefore, statement 2 is sufficient, and the correct answer is B.



Now...consider the number 15! + 1. It's too big a number to know offhand whether it's prime, but we do know that it is NOT a multiple of any numbers 2-15. In order to be a multiple of 2, we'd have to add a multiple of 2 to 15!, and 1 breaks us off of that every-second-number cycle. Same for 3 - we'd need to add a multiple of 3 in order to keep 15! on that every-third cycle, so 15! is not a multiple of 3. We can prove that 15! + 1 is not divisible by any numbers between 2 and 15. It's largest prime factor must then be 17 or greater.

Understanding that ideology and being able to determine divisibility of large numbers can be quite helpful on questions that might otherwise seem impossible. Thanks for posting this question!

I have a question, if 15! + 1 is a prime number ?
15! + 1=1(15*14*13*.....*2+1)
so 15! + 1 is a prime number?
User avatar
VeritasPrepBrian
User avatar
Veritas Prep Representative
Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Last visit: 02 Mar 2022
Posts: 416
Own Kudos:
3,219
 [2]
Given Kudos: 63
Expert
Expert reply
Posts: 416
Kudos: 3,219
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
xiaoxueren


I have a question, if 15! + 1 is a prime number ?
15! + 1=1(15*14*13*.....*2+1)
so 15! + 1 is a prime number?

Yeah really good question. There *is* of course an answer to that, but not one you can prove in 2-3 minutes without a calculator so the GMAT couldn't really ask you about that. You *can* prove that it's not divisible by anything between 2 and 15, but you don't have any easy proof for prime numbers greater than 15 (could it be divisible by 17 or 31 or 53? We just don't know).

Consider 5! + 1. 5! is 120 so 5! + 1 = 121. We know that 5! + 1 can't be divisible by 2, 3, 4, or 5, but the factorial setup doesn't give us any insight as to whether it's divisible by 11 (it is).

So with 15! + 1, we can't predict (without a calculator at least) which larger prime factors it might have, so in the world of GMAT we can't prove whether it's prime or not.
User avatar
sajibmannan
Joined: 18 Oct 2022
Last visit: 21 Feb 2025
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
6
 [2]
Given Kudos: 10
Location: Bangladesh
Posts: 5
Kudos: 6
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
The question asks if we pick any random integer x, will it have a factor \(n\) in the format \(1<n<x\)? Will the integer x have a factor smaller than itself?

Statement 1 says that sometimes it will, and sometimes it won't. This is because sometimes in that range there will be a prime number, and sometimes it won't.

Example:

If x=7, there won't be a factor n in this format \(1<n<x\) because 7 has only two factors (1, 7).

If x=8, then there WILL be a factor n in this format \(1<n<x\) because 8 has four factors (1, 2, 4, 8).

Thus, statement 1 is insufficient.

Statement 2 gives us a range and we can assume it's a big number. If the range includes a prime number then this statement is insufficient too.

Can the statement 2 have a prime number?

If \(x=15!+2\), then, we can factor out 2 since 15! has 2 in it and there's also +2. Subsequently, we can divide that number by 2.

\([(15*14*13*12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*2*1)+2]\)

We can factor 2 and it becomes \(2[(15*14*13*12*11*10*9*8*7*6*5*4*3*1)+1]\)

We can divide this number by 2 and, thus, have a factor \(n=2\), which is smaller than the number \(x=15!+2\).

This pattern continues throughout the range. Any number we choose for \(x\) within this range can be divided in such a way that it has a factor \(n\) smaller than itself (i.e., \(1<n<x\)).

This statement always gives us a definite YES answer, unlike statement 1, which sometimes gives a yes and sometimes a no.

Thus, statement 2 is sufficient.

Answer: B

Trap: This question can overwhelm you with theory and make you lose sight of what's actually needed. That's why it's crucial to stay focused on the main requirement and keep referring back to the question as you work through the problem.
User avatar
Minhaz03
Joined: 11 Sep 2024
Last visit: 25 Aug 2025
Posts: 5
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 37
Posts: 5
Kudos: 1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Regarding Statement 2, can 15!+7 or 15!+11 be a prime? How do we understand that it's not possible? Apologies if I could not understand from the previous replies.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 19 Nov 2025
Posts: 105,390
Own Kudos:
778,330
 [1]
Given Kudos: 99,977
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 105,390
Kudos: 778,330
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Minhaz03
Regarding Statement 2, can 15!+7 or 15!+11 be a prime? How do we understand that it's not possible? Apologies if I could not understand from the previous replies.

None of those can be prime. For example, 15! + 7 can be factored as 7(2 * 3 * 4 * 5 * 6 * 8 * 9 * 10 * 11 * 12 * 13 * 14 * 15 + 1), which shows that 15! + 7 is not prime, as it is the product of two integers greater than 1.
Moderators:
Math Expert
105390 posts
496 posts