Just to inform you that there is another perspective...
If you can "cheat" in an exam, then the examination itself may be flawed. I remember open book exams, take-home exams during my undergrad studies that even if someone "cheated", they had to learn at least something during that.
I consider that approach lazy at best.
I have no idea about US culture (and THAT level of competition) but my view on cheating is:
What would happen if some are cheating? Did they learn anything? If yes, that can even be considered "group study" by some stretch. Do you think you learn anything significant in undergrad? Whole undergrad can be covered in a year of M.Sc.
Will they really have a competitive advantage over you? Assuming they did not learn anything, you have the advantage. You know, they don't. Build upon that. Instead of losing your time asking this question, reading answers, you could have learnt a couple of things already. See the big picture, try to reach higher, read some papers or books.
I wouldn't care if a student A had higher grades than student B. I would choose B with lower grades if they have read a bunch of articles, have some questions about them and can think of novel ways even if naive.
Do whatever your code of conduct or whatnot says to be a "good citizen". Study further instead of pondering over petty details to be a "good scientist". Yes you can be both, too. I am not that interested in former though, I just care about my studies.. People are people.
I am not saying you should close your eyes to unjust. I am just saying that what you see as unjust is just a kid stealing another one's toy in a playground. Yes it technically is unjust but...
My best advice would be to go as much as forward you can so that world's best cheater can't reach you. Find your passion.