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
245 kcal
Score
3 / 100
Acı Tay Sos has a higher nutrition quality score (5) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
74 vs 245(+231.1%)
Score Diff
5 vs 3(-40.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Acı Tay Sos
Higher energy
Ördek Sosu
Score leader
Acı Tay Sos
Nutrient split
27 - 13 (tie: 25)
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.
Acı Tay Sos and Ördek Sosu are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Acı Tay Sos has 74.0 kcal and Ördek Sosu has 245.0 kcal. The difference is 171.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 5 and 3. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
65 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Acı Tay Sos | Ördek Sosu | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | 66 µg | 8 µg | -87.9% |
| Alfa Karoten | 50 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.03 mg | 0.02 mg | -33.3% |
| B12 Vitamini | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| B12 Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.07 mg | 0.01 mg | -85.7% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.12 mg | 0.03 mg | -75.0% |
| Bakir | 0.06 mg | 0.04 mg | -33.3% |
| Besin folati | 0 µg | 2 µg | — |
| Beta Karoten | 735 µg | 100 µg | -86.4% |
| Beta kriptoksantin | 54 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 3.6 mg | 0.9 mg | -75.0% |
| D Vitamini | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Demir | 0.94 mg | 0.39 mg | -58.5% |
| DHA (22:6 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Diyet lifi | 0.5 g | 0.6 g | +20.0% |
| DPA (22:5 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 0.01 mg | 0.2 mg | +1900.0% |
| E Vitamini (eklenmiş) | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Enerji | 74 kj | 245 kj | +231.1% |
| EPA (20:5 n-3) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Etil alkol | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Folat DFE | 2 µg | 2 µg | 0.0% |
| Folik asit | 1 µg | 0 µg | -100.0% |
| Fosfor | 18 mg | 9 mg | -50.0% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | 0.2 µg | 0.3 µg | +50.0% |
| Kafein | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 12 mg | 11 mg | -8.3% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 16.58 g | 60.66 g | +265.9% |
| Kolesterol | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Likopen | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Lutein + zeaksantin | 8 µg | 1 µg | -87.5% |
| Magnezyum | 10 mg | 5 mg | -50.0% |
| MUFA 16:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 18:1 (oleik asit) | 0.05 g | 0.01 g | -80.0% |
| MUFA 20:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| MUFA 22:1 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Niasin | 0.14 mg | 0.24 mg | +71.4% |
| Potasyum | 103 mg | 87 mg | -15.5% |
| Protein | 1.03 g | 0.36 g | -65.0% |
| PUFA 18:2 (linoleik asit) | 0.32 g | 0.02 g | -93.8% |
| PUFA 18:3 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 18:4 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| PUFA 20:4 (arasidonik asit) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Retinol | 0 µg | 0 µg | — |
| Selenyum | 0.5 µg | 1.3 µg | +160.0% |
| SFA 10:0 | 0 g | 0.03 g | — |
| SFA 12:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 14:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 16:0 (palmitik asit) | 0.07 g | 0.01 g | -85.7% |
| SFA 18:0 (stearik asit) | 0.01 g | 0 g | -100.0% |
| SFA 4:0 (butirik asit) | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 6:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| SFA 8:0 | 0 g | 0 g | — |
| Sodyum | 2055 mg | 712 mg | -65.4% |
| Su | 76.16 g | 37.44 g | -50.8% |
| Teobromin | 0 mg | 0 mg | — |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.09 g | 0.05 g | -44.4% |
| Toplam Folat | 1 µg | 2 µg | +100.0% |
| Toplam Kolin | 0 mg | 1.7 mg | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.05 g | 0.02 g | -60.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.66 g | 0.13 g | -80.3% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.32 g | 0.03 g | -90.6% |
| Toplam Şeker | 16.07 g | 30.54 g | +90.0% |
| Çinko | 0.13 mg | 0.21 mg | +61.5% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Acı Tay Sos and Ördek Sosu.
Acı Tay Sos has less energy per 100 g (74 kcal versus 245 kcal).
For measured E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol), Acı Tay Sos has 0.01 mg and Ördek Sosu has 0.2 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: Acı Tay Sos 5, Ördek Sosu 3.
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.