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
158.4 kcal
Score
9 / 100
Tabtim krob has a higher nutrition quality score (9) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
204 vs 158.4(-22.4%)
Score Diff
5 vs 9(+80.0%)
OVERALL WINNER
Tabtim krob
Higher energy
Jeungpyeon
Score leader
Tabtim krob
Nutrient split
10 - 10 (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.
Jeungpyeon and Tabtim krob are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Jeungpyeon has 204.0 kcal and Tabtim krob has 158.4 kcal. The difference is 45.6 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 5 and 9. 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 | Jeungpyeon | Tabtim krob | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.03 mg | 0.024 mg | -20.0% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.02 mg | 0.015 mg | -25.0% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.05 mg | 0.042 mg | -16.0% |
| Bakir | — | 0.08 mg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | — | 1.2 mg | — |
| Demir | 0.35 mg | 0.48 mg | +37.1% |
| Diyet lifi | 0.9 g | 0.95 g | +5.6% |
| Fosfor | 45 mg | 26 mg | -42.2% |
| Kalsiyum | 9 mg | 14 mg | +55.6% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 47.9 g | 24.3 g | -49.3% |
| Kül | 1 g | 1.15 g | +15.0% |
| Magnezyum | 12 mg | 18 mg | +50.0% |
| Mangan | 0.32 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 0.65 mg | 0.32 mg | -50.8% |
| Potasyum | 42 mg | 142 mg | +238.1% |
| Protein | 2.85 g | 1.12 g | -60.7% |
| Sodyum | 215 mg | 22 mg | -89.8% |
| Su | 47.8 g | 65.4 g | +36.8% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 0.12 g | 5.92 g | +4833.3% |
| Toplam Folat | 8 µg | 6 µg | -25.0% |
| Toplam yağ | 0.45 g | 6.85 g | +1422.2% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 0.16 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 12.4 g | 18.2 g | +46.8% |
| Çinko | 0.48 mg | 0.22 mg | -54.2% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Jeungpyeon and Tabtim krob.
Tabtim krob has less energy per 100 g (158.4 kcal versus 204 kcal).
For measured Toplam doymus yağ asitleri, Jeungpyeon has 0.12 g and Tabtim krob has 5.92 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: Jeungpyeon 5, Tabtim krob 9.
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.