Last visit was: 24 Apr 2026, 00:18 It is currently 24 Apr 2026, 00:18
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
irda
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Last visit: 10 Jun 2017
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
80
 [9]
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 20
Kudos: 80
 [9]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
8
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,802
Own Kudos:
810,906
 [2]
Given Kudos: 105,868
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,802
Kudos: 810,906
 [2]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
1
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
irda
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Last visit: 10 Jun 2017
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
80
 [1]
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 20
Kudos: 80
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,802
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,868
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,802
Kudos: 810,906
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
irda
Bunuel,

Thanks. The logic behind the question is unacceptable per my chain of thoughts. I am definitely wrong as both your answer and the answer from the source match, but how can we state the value of unique prime numbers as the value of minimum prime numbers.

Does not minimum number of prime indicate the total number of prime numbers that must be in the numerator? The question does not say unique prime.

can you please help dispel my confusion. It is painful to override my flawed logic , if so.

8-) and thanks again

I see your point but usually the number of prime factors means the number of unique prime factors. For example, we say that 8 has one prime factor - 2, not three primes 2, 2, and 2. Though on the real test, I think, this would be explicitly stated.
User avatar
irda
Joined: 17 Dec 2012
Last visit: 10 Jun 2017
Posts: 20
Own Kudos:
80
 [2]
Given Kudos: 34
Posts: 20
Kudos: 80
 [2]
2
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Your assertion has such remedial effect to us novices. I must accept it is much more than just placebo. Thanks dude.
User avatar
vad3tha
Joined: 22 Feb 2009
Last visit: 15 Dec 2023
Posts: 106
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 148
Posts: 106
Kudos: 584
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
irda
If p is a positive integer and 10p/96 is an integer, then the minimum number of prime factors p could have is

(A) One
(B) Two
(C) Three
(D) Four
(E) Five

10p/96 = 5p/48.

The least positive value of p for which 5p/48 is an integer is 48 = 2^3*3. Hence the minimum number of prime factors p could have is two, namely 2 and 3.

Answer: B

Hope it's clear.

yeah, it is totally clear :-D
avatar
Shiv2016
Joined: 02 Sep 2016
Last visit: 14 Aug 2024
Posts: 509
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 277
Posts: 509
Kudos: 215
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
96= 2^5*3^1

(2*5*p)/2^5*3

Therefore p= 2^4*3^1 (At least)

Two prime factors.
User avatar
app219
Joined: 18 Jul 2018
Last visit: 27 Apr 2019
Posts: 26
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 200
Posts: 26
Kudos: 10
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
Bunuel
irda
Bunuel,

Thanks. The logic behind the question is unacceptable per my chain of thoughts. I am definitely wrong as both your answer and the answer from the source match, but how can we state the value of unique prime numbers as the value of minimum prime numbers.

Does not minimum number of prime indicate the total number of prime numbers that must be in the numerator? The question does not say unique prime.

can you please help dispel my confusion. It is painful to override my flawed logic , if so.

8-) and thanks again

I see your point but usually the number of prime factors means the number of unique prime factors. For example, we say that 8 has one prime factor - 2, not three primes 2, 2, and 2. Though on the real test, I think, this would be explicitly stated.

Hi Bunuel, thanks for your answer!

So should we always consider "number of prime factors" as "nunber of unique primes"...? I am a bit confused as those2 terms are totally 2 different concepts.
User avatar
Bunuel
User avatar
Math Expert
Joined: 02 Sep 2009
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 109,802
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 105,868
Products:
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 109,802
Kudos: 810,906
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
iac00
Bunuel
irda
Bunuel,

Thanks. The logic behind the question is unacceptable per my chain of thoughts. I am definitely wrong as both your answer and the answer from the source match, but how can we state the value of unique prime numbers as the value of minimum prime numbers.

Does not minimum number of prime indicate the total number of prime numbers that must be in the numerator? The question does not say unique prime.

can you please help dispel my confusion. It is painful to override my flawed logic , if so.

8-) and thanks again

I see your point but usually the number of prime factors means the number of unique prime factors. For example, we say that 8 has one prime factor - 2, not three primes 2, 2, and 2. Though on the real test, I think, this would be explicitly stated.

Hi Bunuel, thanks for your answer!

So should we always consider "number of prime factors" as "nunber of unique primes"...? I am a bit confused as those2 terms are totally 2 different concepts.

Yes. I think I answered this above.
User avatar
Archit3110
User avatar
Major Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2017
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 8,628
Own Kudos:
5,190
 [1]
Given Kudos: 243
Status:You learn more from failure than from success.
Location: India
Concentration: Sustainability, Marketing
GMAT Focus 1: 545 Q79 V79 DI73
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
GPA: 4
WE:Marketing (Energy)
Products:
GMAT Focus 2: 645 Q83 V82 DI81
Posts: 8,628
Kudos: 5,190
 [1]
1
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
irda
If p is a positive integer and 10p/96 is an integer, then the minimum number of prime factors p could have is

(A) One
(B) Two
(C) Three
(D) Four
(E) Five


10p/96
96= 2^ 5*3^1

or say
5p/48
or 5p/2^4 *3

so p has to have atleast 2 factors of 2 & 3 ; IMO B
User avatar
ScottTargetTestPrep
User avatar
Target Test Prep Representative
Joined: 14 Oct 2015
Last visit: 23 Apr 2026
Posts: 22,283
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 302
Status:Founder & CEO
Affiliations: Target Test Prep
Location: United States (CA)
Expert
Expert reply
Active GMAT Club Expert! Tag them with @ followed by their username for a faster response.
Posts: 22,283
Kudos: 26,531
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
irda
If p is a positive integer and 10p/96 is an integer, then the minimum number of prime factors p could have is

(A) One
(B) Two
(C) Three
(D) Four
(E) Five

Simplifying we have:

10p/96 = 5p/48

In order for 5p/48 to be an integer, then p must be a multiple of 48. Since 48 = 2^4 x 3, we see that the minimum number of prime factors of p is 2.

Answer: B
User avatar
A_Nishith
Joined: 29 Aug 2023
Last visit: 12 Nov 2025
Posts: 452
Own Kudos:
Given Kudos: 16
Posts: 452
Kudos: 203
Kudos
Add Kudos
Bookmarks
Bookmark this Post
10p/96 = 5p/48.

The least positive value of p for which 5p/48 is an integer is 48 .
48= 2^3*3.
Hence the minimum number of prime factors p could have is two, namely 2 and 3.

Answer: B
Moderators:
Math Expert
109802 posts
Tuck School Moderator
853 posts