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
282 kcal
Score
71 / 100
Acı paprika has a higher nutrition quality score (71) and is the overall winner.
Energy Diff
508 vs 282(-44.5%)
Score Diff
45 vs 71(+57.8%)
OVERALL WINNER
Acı paprika
Higher energy
Kahverengi hardal tohumu
Score leader
Acı paprika
Nutrient split
8 - 11 (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.
Kahverengi hardal tohumu and Acı paprika are compared on a 100 g basis. Check each food record for preparation and portion differences.
Per 100 g, Kahverengi hardal tohumu has 508.0 kcal and Acı paprika has 282.0 kcal. The difference is 226.0 kcal.
The recorded nutrition model scores are 45 and 71. These scores are not personal health outcomes or clinical advice.
19 nutrients have measurements for both records. A dash in the table means no measurement is available; it does not mean zero.
| Nutrients | Kahverengi hardal tohumu | Acı paprika | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| A Vitamini (RAE) | — | 2463 µg | — |
| B1 Vitamini (Tiamin) | 0.81 mg | 0.33 mg | -59.3% |
| B2 Vitamini (Riboflavin) | 0.26 mg | 1.23 mg | +373.1% |
| B6 Vitamini | 0.43 mg | 2.09 mg | +386.0% |
| Bakir | 0.64 mg | — | — |
| Beta Karoten | — | 26162 µg | — |
| C Vitamini (askorbik asit) | 7.1 mg | 0.9 mg | -87.3% |
| Demir | 9.21 mg | 21.14 mg | +129.5% |
| Diyet lifi | 12.2 g | 34.8 g | +185.2% |
| E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol) | 5.07 mg | 29.1 mg | +474.0% |
| Fosfor | 828 mg | 314 mg | -62.1% |
| K Vitamini (filokinon) | — | 80.3 µg | — |
| Kalsiyum | 266 mg | 177 mg | -33.5% |
| Karbonhidrat (farkla) | 28.1 g | 53.99 g | +92.1% |
| Kül | 4.33 g | 7.8 g | +80.1% |
| Magnezyum | 370 mg | 178 mg | -51.9% |
| Mangan | 2.45 mg | — | — |
| Niasin | 4.73 mg | 10.06 mg | +112.7% |
| Potasyum | 738 mg | 2280 mg | +208.9% |
| Protein | 26.08 g | 14.14 g | -45.8% |
| Selenyum | 208.1 µg | — | — |
| Sodyum | 13 mg | 30 mg | +130.8% |
| Su | 5.27 g | 8.05 g | +52.8% |
| Toplam doymus yağ asitleri | 1.98 g | — | — |
| Toplam Folat | 162 µg | — | — |
| Toplam tekli doymamis yağ asitleri | 22.54 g | — | — |
| Toplam yağ | 36.24 g | 12.89 g | -64.4% |
| Toplam çoklu doymamis yağ asitleri | 10.09 g | — | — |
| Toplam Şeker | 6.79 g | — | — |
| Çinko | 6.08 mg | 4.33 mg | -28.8% |
Scientific answers to key differences between Kahverengi hardal tohumu and Acı paprika.
Acı paprika has less energy per 100 g (282 kcal versus 508 kcal).
For measured E Vitamini (alfa-tokoferol), Kahverengi hardal tohumu has 5.07 mg and Acı paprika has 29.1 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: Kahverengi hardal tohumu 45, Acı paprika 71.
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.