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
579 kcal
Score
23 / 100
Akçaağaç tohumu has a higher nutrition quality score (29) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
418 vs 579(+38.5%)
Score Diff
29 vs 23(-20.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Akçaağaç tohumu
Higher energy
Çiğ Badem (Datça)
Score leader
Akçaağaç tohumu
Nutrient split
9 - 13 (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.
Akçaağaç tohumu and Çiğ Badem (Datça) are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Akçaağaç tohumu has 418.0 kcal and Çiğ Badem (Datça) has 579.0 kcal. The difference is 161.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 29 and 23. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
22 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Akçaağaç tohumu | Çiğ Badem (Datça) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.35 mg | 0.205 mg | -41.4% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.18 mg | 1.138 mg | +532.2% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.42 mg | — | — |
| Bakir | 0.85 mg | 1.03 mg | +21.2% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 2.4 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 4.8 mg | 3.71 mg | -22.7% |
| Diyet lifi | 11.5 g | 12.5 g | +8.7% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | — | 25.6 mg | — |
| Folat DFE | 62 µg | — | — |
| Fosfor | 390 mg | 481 mg | +23.3% |
| Kalsiyum | 145 mg | 269 mg | +85.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 38.6 g | 21.55 g | -44.2% |
| Kül | 3.7 g | 2.97 g | -19.7% |
| Magnezyum | 180 mg | 270 mg | +50.0% |
| Mangan | 2.6 mg | 2.18 mg | -16.2% |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 31 g | — |
| Niasin | 2.1 mg | 3.618 mg | +72.3% |
| Potasyum | 650 mg | 733 mg | +12.8% |
| Protein | 22.4 g | 21.15 g | -5.6% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 12 g | — |
| Sodyum | 9 mg | 1 mg | -88.9% |
| Su | 18.5 g | 4.4 g | -76.2% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 2.1 g | 3.8 g | +81.0% |
| Toplam Folat | — | 44 µg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 6.5 g | 31.55 g | +385.4% |
| Toplam yağ | 16.8 g | 49.93 g | +197.2% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 7.2 g | 12.33 g | +71.3% |
| Toplam Şeker | 4.2 g | 4.35 g | +3.6% |
| Çinko | 3.2 mg | 3.12 mg | -2.5% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Akçaağaç tohumu and Çiğ Badem (Datça).
Akçaağaç tohumu has less energy per 100 g (418 kcal versus 579 kcal).
For measured B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin), Akçaağaç tohumu has 0.18 mg and Çiğ Badem (Datça) has 1.138 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: Akçaağaç tohumu 29, Çiğ Badem (Datça) 23.
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.