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
350 kcal
Score
25 / 100
Çeçil Peyniri has a higher nutrition quality score (30) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
315 vs 350(+11.1%)
Score Diff
30 vs 25(-16.7%)
OVERALL WINNER
Çeçil Peyniri
Higher energy
Erzincan Tulum Peyniri
Score leader
Çeçil Peyniri
Nutrient split
8 - 8 (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.
Çeçil Peyniri and Erzincan Tulum Peyniri are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Çeçil Peyniri has 315.0 kcal and Erzincan Tulum Peyniri has 350.0 kcal. The difference is 35.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 30 and 25. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
16 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Çeçil Peyniri | Erzincan Tulum Peyniri | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 245 µg | 240 µg | -2.0% |
| B12 Vitamini | 1.4 µg | 1.2 µg | -14.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.35 mg | 0.4 mg | +14.3% |
| Enerji (Atwater Genel Faktörleri) | 315 kcal | — | — |
| Fosfor | 512 mg | 450 mg | -12.1% |
| Kalsiyum | 710 mg | 650 mg | -8.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 1.8 g | 1.5 g | -16.7% |
| Kolesterol | 72 mg | 95 mg | +31.9% |
| Kül | 3.1 g | 5.8 g | +87.1% |
| Magnezyum | 24 mg | 25 mg | +4.2% |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | — | 7.1 g | — |
| Pantotenik asit | 0.4 mg | — | — |
| Potasyum | 95 mg | 120 mg | +26.3% |
| Protein | 28.2 g | 22.5 g | -20.2% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | — | 0.9 g | — |
| Selenyum | 14.5 µg | — | — |
| SFA 16:0 (palmitik asit) | — | 8.2 g | — |
| SFA 18:0 (stearik asit) | — | 3.4 g | — |
| Sodyum | 1150 mg | 1200 mg | +4.3% |
| Su | 44.5 g | 42 g | -5.6% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 14.2 g | 18.5 g | +30.3% |
| Toplam Kolin | 15.4 mg | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 22.4 g | 28.2 g | +25.9% |
| Çinko | 3.6 mg | 3.5 mg | -2.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Çeçil Peyniri and Erzincan Tulum Peyniri.
Çeçil Peyniri has less energy per 100 g (315 kcal versus 350 kcal).
For measured Kül, Çeçil Peyniri has 3.1 g and Erzincan Tulum Peyniri has 5.8 g 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: Çeçil Peyniri 30, Erzincan Tulum Peyniri 25.
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.