Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef chuck roast, cooked
Beef chuck roast, cooked3
VS
Beef tri-tip, cooked
Beef tri-tip, cooked3

Dead heat · 6 categories decided · 4 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

It's a dead heat — each wins 3 of 6 match-ups.

Pick Beef chuck roast, cooked for more protein, less sodium and more iron.

Pick Beef tri-tip, cooked for less saturated fat, more potassium and more magnesium.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar, calcium and vitamin C.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    283 kcal
    182 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.23 g
    26.75 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    17.56 g
    8.34 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    6.91 g
    3.11 gWIN
  • Sodiumless is better
    WIN48 mg
    55 mg
  • Potassiummore is better
    235 mg
    340 mgWIN
  • Calciummore is better
    17 mg
    17 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    WIN2.38 mg
    1.69 mg
  • Magnesiummore is better
    19 mg
    23 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 chuck roast, cooked vs Beef tri-tip, cooked · Foodatron