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
138 kcal
Score
16 / 100
Couscous osban has a higher nutrition quality score (46) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
171.7 vs 138(-19.6%)
Score Diff
46 vs 16(-65.2%)
OVERALL WINNER
Couscous osban
Higher energy
Couscous osban
Score leader
Couscous osban
Nutrient split
17 - 4 (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.
Couscous osban and Hiyashi chuka are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Couscous osban has 171.7 kcal and Hiyashi chuka has 138.0 kcal. The difference is 33.7 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 46 and 16. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
21 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Couscous osban | Hiyashi chuka | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 142 µg | 32 µg | -77.5% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.11 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 1.45 µg | — | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 4.5 mg | 3.4 mg | -24.4% |
| Demir | 2.1 mg | 0.95 mg | -54.8% |
| Diyet lifi | 1.8 g | 1.3 g | -27.8% |
| Fosfor | 110 mg | 68 mg | -38.2% |
| Kalsiyum | 28 mg | 22 mg | -21.4% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 20.5 g | 20.4 g | -0.5% |
| Kolesterol | 45 mg | 21 mg | -53.3% |
| Kül | 1.3 g | 1.2 g | -7.7% |
| Magnezyum | 24 mg | 16 mg | -33.3% |
| Niasin | 2.3 mg | 1.25 mg | -45.7% |
| Potasyum | 240 mg | 165 mg | -31.3% |
| Protein | 7.8 g | 5.2 g | -33.3% |
| Sodyum | 380 mg | 470 mg | +23.7% |
| Su | 62.1 g | 69.8 g | +12.4% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 2.3 g | 0.65 g | -71.7% |
| Toplam Folat | 36 µg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 2.6 g | 1.25 g | -51.9% |
| Toplam yağ | 6.5 g | 3.4 g | -47.7% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.8 g | 1.22 g | +52.5% |
| Toplam Şeker | 1.2 g | 3.1 g | +158.3% |
| Çinko | 1.6 mg | 0.58 mg | -63.7% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Couscous osban and Hiyashi chuka.
Hiyashi chuka has less energy per 100 g (138 kcal versus 171.7 kcal).
For measured Toplam Şeker, Couscous osban has 1.2 g and Hiyashi chuka has 3.1 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: Couscous osban 46, Hiyashi chuka 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.