SRM University vs Indian Institute of Technology Madras vs WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN COLLEGE vs DG Vaishnav College vs Vels Institute of Science, Technology and Advanced Studies - VISTAS

Side-by-side comparison from 39 verified student reviews. Scan one row at a time — winners are highlighted

Quick verdict
Higher overall rating: Tie
SRM University: wins 0/1 categories
Indian Institute of Technology Madras: wins 0/1 categories
WOMEN'S CHRISTIAN COLLEGE: wins 0/1 categories
DG Vaishnav College: wins 0/1 categories
Vels Institute of Science, Technology and Advanced Studies - VISTAS: wins 0/1 categories
Manonmaniam Sundaranar University: wins 0/1 categories
Sri Venkateswara College of Engineering - SVCE: wins 1/1 categories
Comparing
Chennai, India
4.30
Read more reviews
32 reviews
×
Best programme: Accounting and Finance
Best programme: Data Science and Artificial Intelligence
Best programme: Visual Communication Design
Chennai, India
Not rated
Read more reviews
0 reviews
×
Best programme: Physics
Best programme: Electrical and Electronics Engineering
Category ratings
Facilities
3.88
4.75
5.00
Not rated
Not rated
5.00
5.00
Location
3.47
5.00
5.00
Not rated
Not rated
5.00
4.00
Professors
3.50
5.00
5.00
Not rated
Not rated
5.00
5.00
Internationality
3.50
4.25
4.00
Not rated
Not rated
4.00
5.00
Win
Student life
3.93
4.50
5.00
Not rated
Not rated
5.00
5.00
Value
3.88
5.00
4.00
Not rated
Not rated
4.00
5.00
Accommodation
3.81
4.25
5.00
Not rated
Not rated
5.00
5.00
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • +High-quality education and helpful, experienced professors.
  • +Excellent exposure through diverse programs and industry-aligned curriculum.
  • +Strong focus on placements and practical learning experiences.
  • +Excellent professors and industry-relevant curriculum
  • +High-quality research facilities and opportunities
  • +Strong academic reputation and campus environment
  • +Strong campus culture and student involvement
  • +Good brand recognition

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

  • +Supportive and knowledgeable staff
  • +Well-equipped labs and effective curriculum
  • +Enjoyable campus life
  • +Excellent infrastructure and campus environment
  • +Relevant and up-to-date curriculum
  • +Supportive and knowledgeable faculty
Cons
  • -Biased faculty and unfair grading practices.
  • -Poor campus life and lack of support for genuine talent.
  • -Outdated facilities and lack of modern resources.
  • -Poor administrative and management support.
  • -Ineffective teaching and curriculum quality.
  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor resource availability are major drawbacks.
  • -Instruction quality and course relevance are frequently criticized.

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

  • -Administrative and management issues cause significant frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and poor maintenance are a recurring problem.
  • -Lack of effective communication and support leaves students feeling unsupported.
  • -Administrative and management issues create confusion and frustration.
  • -Outdated facilities and a lack of resources hinder learning.
  • -Overcrowded classes and insufficient support impact the learning experience.
Rating summary
What students say

This institution achieves strong performance, particularly in Student Life, with a rating of 3.93. Facilities and Value also score highly at 3.875. The university's Location, however, received the lowest rating at 3.47, alongside Professors and Internationality which both scored 3.5. Accommodations also received a solid rating of 3.81.

This institution garners exceptional marks, particularly excelling in its professors, location, and perceived value, all achieving a perfect 5. Student life and internationality are also well-regarded at 4.5 and 4.25 respectively. The facilities are rated highly at 4.75, while accommodation, at 4.25, represents the lowest score, though still very positive.

This institution receives outstanding scores in several key areas, notably its facilities, professors, location, student life, and accommodation, all earning a perfect 5 out of 5. Areas for potential improvement lie in internationality and value, which are rated a solid 4 out of 5, indicating good but not exceptional standing.

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

This institution receives near-perfect scores across the board, reflecting outstanding performance in its facilities, professors, location, student life, and accommodation, all scoring a perfect five. While still strong, the university's internationality and value received slightly lower, though still excellent, ratings of four.

This institution demonstrates outstanding performance across nearly all evaluated aspects. Facilities, professors, student life, accommodation, internationality, and perceived value all received perfect scores, indicating exceptional strengths in these core areas. The location is the sole aspect rated slightly lower at a still respectable 4.

Reviews summary
Highlights

University reviews are predominantly positive, with an average rating of 4.34/5. Students praise the quality of education, helpful faculty, and good environment. A small portion (~3%) expressed concerns about campus life and faculty bias.

All four reviews are positive, with an average rating of 4.75/5. Students praise brilliant professors, industry-relevant curriculum, excellent research facilities, and engaging technical events.

This university receives overwhelmingly positive feedback (100%), with students highlighting campus life and brand recognition. There is no negative feedback provided.

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

With an average rating of 4/5, the single review highlights positive curriculum coverage, supportive staff, and good labs. Infrastructure and syllabus advancement are areas noted for improvement, representing ~0% negative feedback.

With a perfect 5/5 average rating from one review, ~100% of feedback is positive. Students highlight strong academics, vibrant campus life, and growth opportunities. The campus is described as beautiful and spacious with modern facilities.

Rating distribution
5★
56%
75%
100%
0%
0%
0%
100%
4★
28%
25%
0%
0%
0%
100%
0%
3★
13%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
2★
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
1★
3%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Most useful review
Most liked

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

Nothing to show

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Review our Privacy Policy for more details.
Close