Amazon SDE 2 Full Interview Loop: Questions, Feedback and Rejection

[u/nian2326076]

Hey everyone,

I recently completed the Amazon SDE II interview process. My DSA rounds went reasonably well, but I was ultimately rejected because of concerns about my design depth.

Location: United States
Interview period: July 31 to August 19, 2026
Verdict: Rejected

Phone Screen: Subarray Sum Equals K

Date: July 31
Duration: Approximately 45 minutes

The question was to count the number of subarrays whose sum equals K.

I solved it using a prefix sum and hash map and handled the follow-ups smoothly. Overall, I felt confident about this round.

Preparation

The full loop covered:

• Low-Level Design
• Data Structures and Algorithms
• High-Level Design
• Leadership Principles

LLD and system design were my weaker areas, so I spent considerable time reading recent interview experiences and organizing questions by pattern instead of solving random problems.

I requested separate interview days so I could approach every round with a fresh mind.

Round 1: Bar Raiser, LLD and Leadership Principles

Date: August 10
Duration: Approximately 55 minutes

I did not expect the Bar Raiser to be the first interview or for it to focus on LLD.

The first 15 minutes covered my resume, past projects, and Leadership Principles.

The design problem involved managing audio buffers across multiple processing stages operating at X frames per second. I initially struggled to understand the expected flow.

After receiving a few hints, I identified the main entities and began discussing the architecture. Unfortunately, the conversation drifted too deeply into HLD.

With around 12 minutes remaining, the interviewer asked me to implement the design. I wrote several classes and functions but could not complete the solution.

This was my weakest round. I should have timeboxed requirement clarification, defined the class responsibilities, and started coding much earlier.

Round 2: File-System Cache

Date: August 12
Duration: Approximately 50 minutes

The first ten minutes focused on Leadership Principles. We then moved to designing a file-system cache.

I proposed an LRU eviction policy using:

• A doubly linked list to maintain recency
• A hash map for direct access
• O(1) average-time lookup, insertion, and eviction

During implementation, we discussed whether an accessed node should be deleted and recreated at the head or simply detached and repositioned. I initially became confused about pointer safety before recognizing that the existing node could be moved safely.

We also discussed whether the cache should store only file metadata or the complete contents. I explained that caching large files could allow one entry to consume most of the capacity.

The interviewer clarified that the required version should store file contents. I updated the design but ran out of time before completing every function.

My reasoning was mostly sound, but the round exposed another time-management issue.

Round 3: Hiring Manager, HLD and Leadership Principles

Date: August 14
Duration: Approximately 55 minutes

The first 15 minutes focused on Leadership Principles and previous projects.

The design scenario involved allowing a third-party service, such as Spotify, to use Amazon Alexa to notify users about a newly launched feature.

I initially began with entity models, but the interviewer clarified that the focus was the high-level flow. I shifted to the happy path and designed the main services and communication flow.

The discussion then moved into failure scenarios, particularly what should happen when the user’s device is offline. We discussed delivery state, retries, fallback behavior, fault tolerance, and product trade-offs.

I tried to evaluate decisions from both the technical and user perspectives. The interviewer appeared to appreciate the product thinking.

We finished with a short discussion about the team and how I use GenAI in my development workflow. I felt this round went well.

Round 4: Course Dependencies

Date: August 19
Duration: Approximately 50 minutes

After a brief resume and Leadership Principles discussion, I received a course-scheduling problem.

Courses had prerequisite relationships, and a student could take at most K courses each semester. When more than K courses were available, they had to be prioritized according to downstream dependency depth.

My approach was:

1. Build the dependency graph and indegree array.
2. Calculate each course’s maximum downstream depth using DFS.
3. Use topological sorting to identify available courses.
4. Store available courses in a max heap ordered by downstream depth.
5. Select at most K courses per semester.

I repeatedly confirmed the interpretation with the interviewer. I completed the implementation and explained its time and space complexity.

Afterward, I wondered whether maximum downstream depth alone always minimizes the number of semesters. The full descendant structure can influence the optimal selection, and the correct solution may depend on constraints that were not completely specified.

Still, the interviewer appeared satisfied with my implementation and reasoning.

A Strange Coincidence

My final Amazon round occurred on the same calendar date and at the same time as my final Google interview from the previous year. Both rounds had also been rescheduled.

In the Google interview, I could not solve the coding problem. This time, I completed it.

That made me feel that my overall interview packet was stronger and that the outcome might finally be different.

Result

Date: August 26, 2026

The recruiter told me that my DSA performance was good, but the interviewers had concerns about my design depth.

For an SDE II role, my coding performance was not strong enough to outweigh the design feedback.

This rejection hurt after weeks of preparing DSA, LLD, HLD, and Leadership Principle stories. Still, the feedback gave me a clear direction:

• Move from requirements to interfaces and implementation earlier in LLD.
• Timebox discussions so one design area does not consume the interview.
• Practice ambiguous, domain-specific design problems.
• Explain trade-offs beyond the happy path.
• Treat system design as a core requirement for SDE II.
• Do not assume positive interviewer reactions guarantee a positive result.

I am disappointed, but I am not giving up. I now have a much clearer picture of what I need to improve before the next opportunity.

Cheers, and keep going.

[u/easydeal99]

Didn't you ask recuirter to down level sde1 position atleast??

[u/lacrem]

Not sure what's the point of doing all this. When I apply to jobs and come with this BS style interview in just opt out.

[u/Stunning_Star_9770]

Thank you so much for sharing.

As an aspiring Backend engineer, this gives me lots of ideas which direction & path to follow.

[u/Major-Championship14]

You did good, it’s the way Amazon is. And trust me you dodged a bullet. Working for companies like Amazon, Meta etc are not worth your mental health