Compare two different foods side-by-side by nutrients, energy, and quality scores.
The CSV contains energy and nutrients per 100 g for these two records only. Missing measurements remain blank rather than zero. Model scores and personal health conclusions are not exported.
Share your experiences or ask your questions.
Energy
277 kcal
Score
53 / 100
Acı paprika has a higher nutrition quality score (71) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
282 vs 277(-1.8%)
Score Diff
71 vs 53(-25.4%)
OVERALL WINNER
Acı paprika
Higher energy
Acı paprika
Score leader
Acı paprika
Nutrient split
15 - 5 (tie: 0)
This chart shows energy per 100 g for both foods.
Each axis is normalized to 0-100; the outer shape indicates relative dominance on that nutrient.
Green/blue bars indicate first food advantage, orange bars indicate second food advantage.
Acı paprika and Uzun Biber (Pippali) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Acı paprika has 282.0 kcal and Uzun Biber (Pippali) has 277.0 kcal. The difference is 5.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 71 and 53. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Acı paprika | Uzun Biber (Pippali) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 2463 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.33 mg | 0.11 mg | -66.7% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 1.23 mg | 0.24 mg | -80.5% |
| B6 Vitamini | 2.09 mg | 0.29 mg | -86.1% |
| Bakir | — | 1.15 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 26162 µg | 310 µg | -98.8% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 0.9 mg | 1.5 mg | +66.7% |
| Demir | 21.14 mg | 18.5 mg | -12.5% |
| Diyet lifi | 34.8 g | 26.3 g | -24.4% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 29.1 mg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 314 mg | 160 mg | -49.0% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 80.3 µg | 90 µg | +12.1% |
| Kalsiyum | 177 mg | 440 mg | +148.6% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 53.99 g | 58.6 g | +8.5% |
| Kül | 7.8 g | 4.5 g | -42.3% |
| Magnezyum | 178 mg | 165 mg | -7.3% |
| Mangan | — | 4.8 mg | — |
| Niasin | 10.06 mg | 1.85 mg | -81.6% |
| Potasyum | 2280 mg | 1260 mg | -44.7% |
| Protein | 14.14 g | 10.4 g | -26.4% |
| Sodyum | 30 mg | 22 mg | -26.7% |
| Su | 8.05 g | 11.2 g | +39.1% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | — | 1.39 g | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 0.74 g | — |
| Toplam yağ | 12.89 g | 3.3 g | -74.4% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | — | 1 g | — |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 0.6 g | — |
| Çinko | 4.33 mg | 1.35 mg | -68.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Acı paprika and Uzun Biber (Pippali).
Uzun Biber (Pippali) has less energy per 100 g (277 kcal versus 282 kcal).
For measured Kalsiyum, Acı paprika has 177 mg and Uzun Biber (Pippali) has 440 mg per 100 g. The table shows other nutrients separately.
The score summarizes this site's nutrient model. It does not establish that one food is healthier or suitable for everyone. Scores: Acı paprika 71, Uzun Biber (Pippali) 53.
Energy and nutrient values in the table are per 100 g. Actual intake changes with serving size.
Data Sources
Records may come from different sources. Check each food page for source and preparation details; do not treat missing measurements as zero.
Analytical Methodology
The scoring algorithm is a scale of 100 based on nutrient density and macro/micro component balance.