"was set to" vs "was set at"

Question

"was set to" vs "was set at"

Both "was set to" and "was set at" are correct phrases, but they are used in different contexts. "Was set to" is commonly used when referring to a specific value or state that something was adjusted to, while "was set at" is often used when indicating a fixed position or level. The choice between the two depends on the specific situation and what is being described.

Last Updated: March 26, 2024

This phrase is used when referring to a specific value or state that something was adjusted to. It indicates a change or adjustment to a particular setting or condition.

Examples:

The temperature was set to 75 degrees Fahrenheit.
The alarm was set to go off at 7 a.m.
The deadline was set to next Friday.
The device was set to silent mode.
The goal was set to increase sales by 20%.

Alternatives:

was adjusted to
was changed to
was fixed at
was established as
was designated as

This phrase is often used when indicating a fixed position or level. It is commonly used to describe a specific point or level that is established or defined.

Examples:

The price was set at $100.
The meeting was set at the conference room.
The speed limit was set at 55 miles per hour.
The interest rate was set at 3%.
The volume was set at maximum.

Alternatives:

was established at
was defined as
was placed at
was positioned at
was located at

Answer 1

was set to

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

Answer 2

was set at

This phrase is correct and commonly used in English.

"was set to" vs "was set at"

was set to

was set at

Related Comparisons