IBPS conducted common written examination (CWE) for recruitment in Regional Rural Banks (RRBs) in the officer scale I, II, III on 2nd September 2012. Many of our visitors appeared in the examination for the coveted jobs equivalent to bank POs in the regional rural banks (RRBs).

As per some of the comments from the candidated who appeared in the IBPS RRB examination today, the test paper was much simpler than the monstrous IBPS PO paper held during 17 June 2012. The paper was easy although General Awareness was a little bit tough and Quantitative Ability (QA or Maths) section was time consuming.

Please let us know your comments on the RRB examination. Did you also felt it is easier than the IBPS PO on june 17? Also, leave comments on the number of questions attempted along with the difficulty level of each of the section.

We will then collate the data and publish it for the benefit of all.

Also, don’t forget to LIKE our Facebook Page to receive updates on the IBPS examinations and results.


1 2 3 13
  • shyam sunder says:

    paper was not easy english, hindi and computer section is gud but gen awer. and Q.a and maths is not easy. these 3 sections was dicress the chance of clear the paper

  • RUBINA says:

    math section was not easy… reasonig gk comp was easy..

  • satya says:

    My rarating 5/2

  • megha says:

    paper was not easy . ibps is making all of us foll it is given task by banks to fetch money from unemployed people and exploit them

  • satya says:


  • ashiesh sharma says:

    paper was average. math section was little bit hard.resoning was gud.current affairs confused me.english and computer were easy and So worthy…………:)

  • Shivesh says:

    Well paper was tough overall . Quant was lengthy and series questions were really tough. Reasoning is simple but non verbal were very tough to solve. GA was ok but not easy through. And computer was tough for me atleast and for others i cant say. English is easy. I did 158 questions over all .

  • chetna says:

    paper was not easy. maths is very tough………..

  • jagdish says:

    paper was average..
    reson.,compu.,eng., are easy.
    bt maths time consuming. and g.k was really tough.

  • chetna says:

    paper was not easy maths is very tough and reasoning is very typical…….. gk is quite ok bt not easy and computers and english was so easy..

  • Subho says:

    Quantitative section was time consuming. I don’t know how many correct answers will be good for cut off.

  • Rahul says:

    paper was so.so…I.mean English n reasoning n comp were easy…maths n g.a. were average but time consuming..
    I did 148…. let’s see…

  • Animesh says:

    Again math sec. Was hard and typical but every sec. Was avg…

  • Animesh says:

    Overall I did 168 out f 200 lets see what wil be the consequence f dis tough challenge….

  • anju yadav says:

    paper was nice as compared to the last nightmare of 17th june… AVERAGE paper with maths being a bit lengthy as well as difficult & non-verbal reasoning was also time taking…

  • sunil chouhary says:

    diff scale out of 5
    math -5-5
    rsng -5-3
    ga -5-5

  • Radhe sham says:

    Papr was not so difficult… I mean reasning n english was easy but quant was time consuming…
    But i did 170 out of 200

  • abhinav says:

    paper was average

  • sona says:

    can any one tell me what are the qualifying marks for each section. I did pretty well in all sections except maths. In maths I attempted only 16 questions, it was time consuming, I couldn’t do more :( Please tell me… I am in dilemma…what are my chances to clear the maths section.

  • TANUJA says:

    In this exam containing 200 bits those have to be answered in 150 minutes time span. I answered 117 bits, I personally feel reasoning was better, computer knowledge is easier, English was far easier, but quant was little time consuming,general awareness needs little practice which i was basically lagging in. Over all the exam difficulty level is MEDIUM. I was not happy with my General awareness section any how good luck guys who fared well in the exam.

  • TANUJA says:

    I personally feel that those who answer 150 bits in 150 minutes are 100% efficient. but who answers beyond 150 are out of our(a common student’s) reach or may be some of his/her answers may be fluck. The reason is reading those questions it self kills the time.

  • TANUJA says:

    if you answer 16 questions with 85% accuracy you will definitely clear the quant part.

  • Harry says:

    Well paper is so easy till I read first question of math , I have full 70mins to do maths section , but time go shorter and shorter , and attemp only 30 question , I did almost 170 questions

  • Harry says:

    IBPS , not tell about cutoff marks, may be after result IBPS reduce for QA,

    We hope if we get 18-24 is range for cut off for QA in total 50 marks .. so if you have 16 question without any wrong answer can clear in this exam.

  • rahul jha says:

    I have given the exam for the sake of experience .. i found it really easy..i felt difficulties in only GA section because i dont prepare for the exams.. i only go through news papers…. so i have answered only 22 question.. and otherwise it was easy…..

  • sakshi says:

    exam was realy good..not too tuff to solve i.but math only tuff…all sections r easy…so cut off as usual high hi jayga….hope for the best…score card to le hi lenge sab bacche.po easy to clerk ka to pta nahi bhut hi easy hoga

  • Kaustav Mukherjee says:

    Paper was on the whole MIXED. Computer was easy expect 4-5 questions. General awareness so so, 70% easy. Math was tricky and time consuming- missing number took a lot of time and as usual lot of calculations in the graphical portion in math. In the GI unfortunately I could not complete the circular sitting arrangement and I think some problem with the questions(only my opinion). Non-verbal as expected- TOUGH. overall not satisfactory for me.

  • sona says:


  • Union says:

    copy of last year IBPS PO

  • sona says:

    I too think, there was some mistake in the circular arrangement. I tried that part twice, in two diff. ways. But I think there was something wrong. If anyone attempted that part. Please reply.

1 2 3 13

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *