Real Interview Experiences
Learn what to expect directly from candidates and interviewers who've been through it.
Interviewed recently? Share your experience to try it free, or become a member for full access.
“By the time I got to OpenAI, I’d interviewed with 11 or 12 companies, so my behavioral was very well rehearsed. I kept openings in my answers so if they followed up, they’d go where I wanted them to go.”
“The recruiter said to expect LeetCode medium hard, but I got this very practical Excel problem around formulas, caching, and invalidation. The most unique part was the project deep dive where they really tried to cut through the BS and ask what I actually did.”
“Funnily enough, I work at Replit, and even for our interviews we have candidates use AI. What you're testing now isn't correctness of code, it's whether someone can reason about the code that gets generated, and OpenAI hadn't really adopted that mindset yet.”
“It was very rigorous but the recruiter was actually accurate and helpful about what to prepare, which is rare and I really appreciated that. The process consisted of a system design interview and a coding interview. The system design round focused on designing a payment processing system. The interviewer pushed beyond a basic design and spent a lot of time exploring failure modes, retries, idempotency, operational concerns, and correctness under real-world conditions. It felt closer to designing something that could actually run in production than many system design interviews I've done elsewhere. The coding round was also fairly challenging. The problem itself wasn't especially difficult from an algorithmic perspective, but it required careful handling of edge cases and a precise understanding of the requirements. I felt like there was less emphasis on LeetCode-style tricks and more emphasis on building a correct, production-quality solution. What went well was that the interviewers were engaged and clearly knowledgeable. The conversations felt collaborative rather than adversarial. What didn't go well, at least for me, was that I underestimated how much depth they expected around correctness and edge cases. In hindsight, I would have spent more time validating assumptions and thinking through failure scenarios before diving into implementation.”
“The process was short-lived for me, unfortunately. The coding interview was an hour long, and the question was similar to the game of life, but for an infection spreading across a 2D array. I approached it much too methodically - explaining my approach before implementing, like I've learned to do from past technical interviews. The thing about this one is that theres FIVE long parts, and you have to pass the test cases for each part before you move on to the next. If I could do it again I would be frantically coding from the very beginning - waste no time. Add print statements to debug. The interviewer doesn't help or guide much, its mostly on you.”
“The bar is pretty high, but the process is very smooth. The coding and system design need to be completed fast.”
“Coding round went fine. Need to get to a working solution fast before polishing or optimizing approach. For the system design need to cover both frontend and backend pieces. Focusing on just one piece might not help your case. ”
Preview full access of other recent interview experiences
“The weirdest Anthropic round was the company values interview. It was almost like a therapy session, and honestly if you went to a therapist at some point, you will pass that round much more easily.”
“What was very unusual is they didn’t give me any tooling to draw the system design, so I just sketched it on a piece of paper and talked them through it, then we got into this oddly deep debate about whether hover-over history should count as a recommendation signal.”
