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
Adaçayı (Kuru) has a higher nutrition quality score (76) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
315 vs 277(-12.1%)
Score Diff
76 vs 53(-30.3%)
OVERALL WINNER
Adaçayı (Kuru)
Higher energy
Adaçayı (Kuru)
Score leader
Adaçayı (Kuru)
Nutrient split
19 - 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.
Adaçayı (Kuru) and Uzun Biber (Pippali) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Adaçayı (Kuru) has 315.0 kcal and Uzun Biber (Pippali) has 277.0 kcal. The difference is 38.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 76 and 53. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
24 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Adaçayı (Kuru) | Uzun Biber (Pippali) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 295 µg | — | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.75 mg | 0.11 mg | -85.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.34 mg | 0.24 mg | -29.4% |
| B6 Vitamini | 2.69 mg | 0.29 mg | -89.2% |
| Bakir | — | 1.15 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 310 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 31.4 mg | 1.5 mg | -95.2% |
| Demir | 28.12 mg | 18.5 mg | -34.2% |
| Diyet lifi | 40.3 g | 26.3 g | -34.7% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 7.48 mg | — | — |
| Folat DFE | 274 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 91 mg | 160 mg | +75.8% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 1714 µg | 90 µg | -94.7% |
| Kalsiyum | 1652 mg | 440 mg | -73.4% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 60.73 g | 58.6 g | -3.5% |
| Kül | 7.93 g | 4.5 g | -43.3% |
| Magnezyum | 428 mg | 165 mg | -61.4% |
| Mangan | 3.13 mg | 4.8 mg | +53.4% |
| Niasin | 5.72 mg | 1.85 mg | -67.7% |
| Potasyum | 1070 mg | 1260 mg | +17.8% |
| Protein | 10.63 g | 10.4 g | -2.2% |
| Sodyum | 11 mg | 22 mg | +100.0% |
| Su | 7.96 g | 11.2 g | +40.7% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 7.01 g | 1.39 g | -80.2% |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.87 g | 0.74 g | -60.4% |
| Toplam yağ | 12.75 g | 3.3 g | -74.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.76 g | 1 g | -43.2% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.71 g | 0.6 g | -64.9% |
| Çinko | 4.7 mg | 1.35 mg | -71.3% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Adaçayı (Kuru) and Uzun Biber (Pippali).
Uzun Biber (Pippali) has less energy per 100 g (277 kcal versus 315 kcal).
For measured Sodyum, Adaçayı (Kuru) has 11 mg and Uzun Biber (Pippali) has 22 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: Adaçayı (Kuru) 76, 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.