SDE-3 at Cashfree

How it went

What they would tell you

How to prepare

Round by round

1. 1

   Coding Round 160 min

   This round involved two parts. The first was a DSA coding session focused on easy to medium problems typical across companies, nothing obscure or unexpected. Once the solution was implemented, I was asked to switch roles and act as a code reviewer. I had to walk through another developer’s code, identify issues, suggest improvements, and comment on best practices. The goal here was to check if I could think clearly, communicate effectively, and reason about someone else’s logic.

2. 2

   Machine Coding60 min

   I was asked to implement a Tic-Tac-Toe game engine, with working logic for win condition detection, board management, and player turns. The interviewer evaluated

   • Code structure and modularity
   • Ability to extend and improve the solution
   • Edge case handling and correctness We also discussed follow-up questions like how I would handle larger boards, AI integration, and concurrency in multiplayer scenarios. The round went very well, the interviewer was highly experienced and kept the conversation constructive throughout.
3. 3

   High-Level Design60 min

   I was asked to design a Notification Service. Since I had built a similar system in a previous startup from scratch, this round played to my strengths. We covered:

   • Use cases: email, SMS, push
   • Architecture: queue-based fan-out model
   • Retry mechanisms, rate limiting, priority-based delivery
   • Extensibility for new channels I was able to confidently walk through the design, suggest improvements, and also discuss trade-offs in system evolution.
4. 4

   Director Discussion60 min

   Unfortunately, this round was the most underwhelming part of the process. Despite taking time off from my current role and commuting to their office, I was made to wait nearly 2 hours before the discussion began. When it did, the director appeared disengaged, visibly tired, and not in the right frame of mind. Key frustrations from this round:

   • The interviewer repeatedly questioned the credibility of my past achievements, implying I couldn’t have contributed independently.
   • Follow-up questions felt dismissive and lacked depth, I had to repeat or re-explain simple architecture decisions. By the end of the conversation, I got the sense that I was never in serious contention despite clearing the first three rounds.

What came up