differences between BSc and MSc

A BSc is normally a 3 year undergraduate course.

An MSc is a typically a 1 year taught or research masters degree.

An MSci (or equivalent) is a 4 year undergraduate masters course that includes all the material of the BSc followed by masters level courses and a reserach project.

An MSc isn't automatically beneficial for employment, it has to be relevant to what you're looking to do after. An MSci is a more rounded qualification than an MSc and superior to a BSc degree in every sense since it includs all of the material and more. Taught masters (MSc) are seen as inferior to research masters (or combi's) for PhD applications.

There's also some concern in certain subjects/instances at the perception that people with MSc's take them because they have a ''poor'' first degree and so to improve their prospects they get onto masters courses. Although this is true to an extent there are still plenty of students with good degrees that take them

Msc is an undergraduate masters though right?

An article I read (Can't remember where but I will look) said that a Master's is the best accolade to have on a CV, I think it was quoted to be a job magnet.

In Scotland they're both the same.

Surely not better than a PhD?

In Scotland they're both the same.

Not really. In Scotland you're awarded a MA which is an undergraduate Bachelors degree, and NOT an undergraduate Masters. The whole 'MA' thing is traditional, in the same way that Cambridge and Oxford award BA for pretty much all their degrees and then after five years award an MA.

It Scottish ancients is a bit different though. They have to name things differently because they call their degrees MAs.