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
65 kcal
Score
75 / 100
Taze Tarhun Otu has a higher nutrition quality score (75) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
72 vs 65(-9.7%)
Score Diff
45 vs 75(+66.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Taze Tarhun Otu
Higher energy
Arpacık Soğan
Score leader
Taze Tarhun Otu
Nutrient split
3 - 16 (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.
Arpacık Soğan and Taze Tarhun Otu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Arpacık Soğan has 72.0 kcal and Taze Tarhun Otu has 65.0 kcal. The difference is 7.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 45 and 75. 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 | Arpacık Soğan | Taze Tarhun Otu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (IU) | 66 iu | — | — |
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 110 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.06 mg | 0.12 mg | +100.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.02 mg | 0.28 mg | +1300.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.345 mg | 0.55 mg | +59.4% |
| Bakir | 0.088 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 1320 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 8 mg | 18 mg | +125.0% |
| Demir | 1.2 mg | 7.2 mg | +500.0% |
| Diyet lifi | 3.2 g | 3.8 g | +18.7% |
| Fosfor | 60 mg | 65 mg | +8.3% |
| Kalsiyum | 37 mg | 260 mg | +602.7% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 16.8 g | 10.4 g | -38.1% |
| Magnezyum | 21 mg | 70 mg | +233.3% |
| Mangan | 0.292 mg | 1.8 mg | +516.4% |
| Niasin | 0.2 mg | 2.1 mg | +950.0% |
| Potasyum | 334 mg | — | — |
| Protein | 2.5 g | 4.6 g | +84.0% |
| Selenyum | 1.2 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 12 mg | 15 mg | +25.0% |
| Su | 79.8 g | 77.2 g | -3.3% |
| Toplam Folat | 34 µg | 60 µg | +76.5% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.1 g | 1.1 g | +1000.0% |
| Toplam Şeker | 7.87 g | 0.8 g | -89.8% |
| Çinko | 0.4 mg | 0.8 mg | +100.0% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Arpacık Soğan and Taze Tarhun Otu.
Taze Tarhun Otu has less energy per 100 g (65 kcal versus 72 kcal).
For measured B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin), Arpacık Soğan has 0.02 mg and Taze Tarhun Otu has 0.28 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: Arpacık Soğan 45, Taze Tarhun Otu 75.
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.