is the work harder at better Uni's??

The amount of presumed knowledge at Oxford can be quite steep at times, so I would imagine some people finding it a little difficult.

First week: Resonance and aromaticity, acidity, basicity, organic nomenclature.
Second week: Stereochemistry and conformational analysis
Third week: thermodynamics I
Fourth week: thermodynamics II

Bear in mind that this is tutorial work which you must learn on your own + solve the problem sheets without having had any teaching on the topics.

But you can learn on your own, autodidactism is the backbone of university level learning. They aren't easy on you because you are all supposed to be top students. However you get the tutorials on these subjects so that is one to one teaching time spent on them, which is not what most other students get. Okay you have to prepare in advance for the tutorial, but its not like your failures and mistakes will not be discussed and corrections suggested in your tutorials - that is as much teaching as a lecture (if not more so I would argue). Like I said, the difficulty in the oxbridge system is not one of level or standards but one of expectation and teaching style, you are all expected to be as capable and behave like first class students not 2nd class students because you all have that potential. There is less opportunity to blag or just skive as there is at other universities - this can be both a blessing and a curse.

So far I have really enjoyed their system, and I think it is very effective since you get time to focus on one topic a time. And as you said, if you miss the point it will be noticed in the tutorial.

Bear in mind that this is tutorial work which you must learn on your own + solve the problem sheets without having had any teaching on the topics.

I think one thing that whether you're going to a top of the table university or a bottom of the table university which is almost universal is that going to highly ranked institution will definitely count for more in the post-graduate market. There is no doubting that having gone to Oxford, Cambridge, et al. buys you a selling point which is far more attractive than having a first class honours from #322 in the league table simply by the brand name of having an Oxford/Cambridge/Imperial education.

Well comparing with mates at other universities, oxford and cambridge have a WAY higher workload, but in general, at least for my degree, the material covered is pretty much the same, you just get more and harder questions. To be honest I don't really see the point, and apparently it only gives us like an extra 3% of firsts or something. Personally i think it stops people knowing and understanding so much, as you've got so much on that you only really get a superficial knowledge of what you're meant to be doing and dont have time to just think about it and make sure it sinks in.

Well comparing with mates at other universities, oxford and cambridge have a WAY higher workload, but in general, at least for my degree, the material covered is pretty much the same, you just get more and harder questions. To be honest I don't really see the point, and apparently it only gives us like an extra 3% of firsts or something. Personally i think it stops people knowing and understanding so much, as you've got so much on that you only really get a superficial knowledge of what you're meant to be doing and dont have time to just think about it and make sure it sinks in.

Not sure how much I agree with that. Probably like yours, my subject (History) is much harder at Cambridge than it is at most other universities, not in terms of subject matter, but in terms of workload and expectations. We have a week to read a fairly massive amount of literature, absorb it all, create an argument and produce a 2500-3000 word essay (something which, for some people, was done to a much lower level in 5 months). And we do this every single week, giving us 8 essays for every module we do, at other universities this can be as low as one essay per module with much slacker deadlines and much less pressure. It is intense, but it forces you to get in-depth knowledge of your essay area quickly, if you didn't then you would flounder in supervisions with people who are experts on your subject (if my supervisor hasn't done most of the groundwork for the historical analysis in the books I've read, she has either written the books or knows the people who have personally - any slight mistake, moment of hyperbole or confusing sentence and it'll be picked up). So, in my experience, yes we have to work quickly, but the knowledge is far from superficial (though it is limited in scope, if not depth, history tends to be limited to case-studies of snap-shots in time).

But to go back to the original question... personally i think it is. 'Better' uni means they attract better (for want of a better word) academics, so you learn from people who know more and have a better understanding, meaning you have more to learn and most likely more work.