Skip to content
Foodatron logoFoodatron
Beef eye of round, cooked Leader
Beef eye of round, cooked4
VS
Beef tongue, cooked
Beef tongue, cooked3

Beef eye of round, cooked leads 4–3 · 7 categories decided · 3 ties

Each value is per 100 g edible portion.

The verdict

Beef eye of round, cooked comes out ahead, winning 4 of 7 nutrient match-ups.

Pick Beef eye of round, cooked for more protein, less saturated fat, more potassium and more calcium.

Pick Beef tongue, cooked for less sodium, more iron and more vitamin C.

Evenly matched on fiber, sugar and magnesium.

Equal weight (per 100 g)Common servingEqual calories

Head-to-head

  • Energy
    171 kcal
    284 kcal
  • Proteinmore is better
    WIN29.79 g
    19.29 g
  • Carbohydrate
    0 g
    0 g
  • Fibermore is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total sugarsless is better
    0 g
    0 g
  • Total fat
    4.83 g
    22.3 g
  • Saturated fatless is better
    WIN1.66 g
    8.13 g
  • Sodiumless is better
    66 mg
    65 mgWIN
  • Potassiummore is better
    WIN408 mg
    184 mg
  • Calciummore is better
    WIN16 mg
    5 mg
  • Ironmore is better
    1.86 mg
    2.61 mgWIN
  • Magnesiummore is better
    15 mg
    15 mg
  • Vitamin Cmore is better
    0 mg
    1.3 mgWIN
  • 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 eye of round, cooked vs Beef tongue, cooked · Foodatron