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
132 kcal
Score
30 / 100
Gyeran jjim has a higher nutrition quality score (53) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
78.5 vs 132(+68.2%)
Score Diff
53 vs 30(-43.4%)
OVERALL WINNER
Gyeran jjim
Higher energy
Mi quang
Score leader
Gyeran jjim
Nutrient split
13 - 7 (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.
Gyeran jjim and Mi quang are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Gyeran jjim has 78.5 kcal and Mi quang has 132.0 kcal. The difference is 53.5 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 53 and 30. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
20 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Gyeran jjim | Mi quang | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 92 µg | 26 µg | -71.7% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| B12 Vitamini | 0.52 µg | 0.32 µg | -38.5% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.26 mg | 0.06 mg | -76.9% |
| B6 Vitamini | — | 0.12 mg | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 145 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 4.2 mg | — |
| D Vitamini | 1.15 µg | — | — |
| Demir | 1.05 mg | 1.15 mg | +9.5% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.15 g | 1.2 g | +700.0% |
| Folat DFE | — | 21 µg | — |
| Fosfor | 112 mg | 86 mg | -23.2% |
| Kalsiyum | 42 mg | 34 mg | -19.0% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 0.95 g | 16.5 g | +1636.8% |
| Kolesterol | 198 mg | 24 mg | -87.9% |
| Kül | 1.48 g | 1.2 g | -18.9% |
| Magnezyum | 9.4 mg | 18 mg | +91.5% |
| Niasin | — | 1.85 mg | — |
| Potasyum | 128 mg | 168 mg | +31.3% |
| Protein | 7.15 g | 6.4 g | -10.5% |
| Selenyum | 17.5 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 435 mg | 385 mg | -11.5% |
| Su | 85.3 g | 74.2 g | -13.0% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.62 g | 1.25 g | -22.8% |
| Toplam Folat | 28.5 µg | — | — |
| Toplam Kolin | 142 mg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 1.98 g | 1.82 g | -8.1% |
| Toplam yağ | 5.12 g | 4.5 g | -12.1% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.88 g | 1.12 g | +27.3% |
| Toplam Şeker | — | 1.1 g | — |
| Çinko | 0.78 mg | 0.82 mg | +5.1% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Gyeran jjim and Mi quang.
Gyeran jjim has less energy per 100 g (78.5 kcal versus 132 kcal).
For measured Karbonhidrat (farkla), Gyeran jjim has 0.95 g and Mi quang has 16.5 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: Gyeran jjim 53, Mi quang 30.
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.