Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef bottom round, cooked
Beef bottom round, cooked3
VS
Pork chop, cooked Leader
Pork chop, cooked4

Pork chop, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Beef bottom round, cooked: 100 g · Pork chop, cooked: 100 g.

The verdict

Pork chop, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef bottom round, cooked for more protein, less sodium and more iron.

Pick Pork chop, cooked for less saturated fat, more potassium, more calcium and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    230 kcal
    209 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN32.73 g
    25.61 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    10 g
    11.06 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    3.59 g
    3.52 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN42 mg
    55 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    264 mg
    344 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    7 mg
    24 mgWIN
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN2.71 mg
    0.79 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    21 mg
    25 mgWIN
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    0 mg
  • Vitamin Dmore is better
    —
    —

Winners are decided by deterministic per-metric rules on the stated basis; ties and missing data don’t score (missing ≠ zero). Educational information only — not medical advice.

Beef bottom round, cooked vs Pork chop, cooked · Foodatron