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
354 kcal
Score
16 / 100
Altın kinoa has a higher nutrition quality score (32) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
368 vs 354(-3.8%)
Score Diff
32 vs 16(-50.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Altın kinoa
Higher energy
Altın kinoa
Score leader
Altın kinoa
Nutrient split
14 - 4 (tie: 1)
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.
Altın kinoa and Çeltik Pirinci are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Altın kinoa has 368.0 kcal and Çeltik Pirinci has 354.0 kcal. The difference is 14.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 32 and 16. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
19 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Altın kinoa | Çeltik Pirinci | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.36 mg | 0.4 mg | +11.1% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.32 mg | 0.05 mg | -84.4% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.49 mg | 0.35 mg | -28.6% |
| Bakir | 0.59 mg | — | — |
| Demir | 4.57 mg | 1.8 mg | -60.6% |
| Diyet lifi | 7 g | 3.4 g | -51.4% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 2.44 mg | 0.7 mg | -71.3% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 368 kcal | — | — |
| Fosfor | 457 mg | 220 mg | -51.9% |
| Kalsiyum | 47 mg | 23 mg | -51.1% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 64.16 g | 76.2 g | +18.8% |
| Kül | — | 1.2 g | — |
| Magnezyum | 197 mg | 110 mg | -44.2% |
| Mangan | 2 mg | 2 mg | 0.0% |
| Niasin | 1.52 mg | 4.5 mg | +196.1% |
| Potasyum | 563 mg | 210 mg | -62.7% |
| Protein | 14.12 g | 7.5 g | -46.9% |
| Selenyum | 8.5 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 5 mg | 6 mg | +20.0% |
| Su | 13.28 g | 12.2 g | -8.1% |
| Toplam Folat | 184 µg | 20 µg | -89.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 6.07 g | 2.2 g | -63.8% |
| Toplam Şeker | 0.1 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 3.1 mg | 1.4 mg | -54.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Altın kinoa and Çeltik Pirinci.
Çeltik Pirinci has less energy per 100 g (354 kcal versus 368 kcal).
For measured Niasin, Altın kinoa has 1.52 mg and Çeltik Pirinci has 4.5 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: Altın kinoa 32, Çeltik Pirinci 16.
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.