Blue or roquefort cheese dressing: regular vs fat free USDA FDC 2710197 vs 2710229
Per 100 g, regular reports 51.1 g total fat, while fat free reports 1 g total fat.
The comparison uses two cited USDA records. Their complete source names, household portions, nutrient values, and FoodData Central links remain visible below.
Record B · FDC 2710229
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free
Check this record in FoodData Central ↗Highlighted difference
Calories at the same 100-gram weight
Bar length shows the two cited values on one shared denominator. It does not rank either food or establish why they differ.
- Blue or roquefort cheese dressing 484 kcal
484 kcal -
115 kcal
Shared basis: 100 g · kcal
Equal-weight evidence
Nutrition per 100 grams
Both columns use the same mass, which compares nutrient concentration without allowing the two representative source amounts to change the denominator. “A +” or “B +” reports the arithmetic difference between the cited values; it is not a quality score.
On smaller screens, focus a comparison table and scroll horizontally to read every column.
| Nutrient | A · Blue or roquefort cheese dressing | B · Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaloriesMaterial difference | 484 kcal | 115 kcal | A +369 kcal |
| Protein | 1.4 g | 1.5 g | B +0.1 g |
| Total fatMaterial difference | 51.1 g | 1 g | A +50.1 g |
| CarbohydrateMaterial difference | 4.8 g | 25.6 g | B +20.8 g |
| Dietary fiberMaterial difference | 0.4 g | 1.8 g | B +1.4 g |
| Total sugars | 3.5 g | 7.4 g | B +4 g |
| SodiumMaterial difference | 642 mg | 814 mg | B +172 mg |
| Saturated fatMaterial difference | 8.3 g | 0.5 g | A +7.8 g |
| PotassiumMaterial difference | 88 mg | 194 mg | B +106 mg |
| Calcium | 37 mg | 51 mg | B +14 mg |
| Iron | 0.1 mg | 0.1 mg | No difference at displayed precision |
Values come from the two cited USDA FoodData Central Survey Foods records. Feast does not average records, impute missing values, or infer a nutrient from the food name.
Read the table by question
The material primary-nutrient differences run in both directions: A is higher on 2, while B is higher on 3.
These answers describe concentration per 100 grams. “More” and “less” identify the arithmetic direction only; they do not decide which record is a better match or which food is better for a person.
Which reports fewer calories?
Record B
Record B reports 115 kcal, compared with 484 kcal in the other record—a difference of 369 kcal.
Which reports more protein?
Record B
Record B reports 1.5 g, compared with 1.4 g in the other record—a difference of 0.1 g.
Which reports more fiber?
Record B
Record B reports 1.8 g, compared with 0.4 g in the other record—a difference of 1.4 g.
Which reports less sodium?
Record A
Record A reports 642 mg, compared with 814 mg in the other record—a difference of 172 mg.
What differs in the source descriptions
The exact names carry information the numbers cannot.
USDA assigns both records to “Salad dressings and vegetable oils,” but the topic label is broad. Record A is “Blue or roquefort cheese dressing.” Record B is “Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free.” Feast paired them because their contrast-neutral food identities are an exact match, not merely because they share a generic category.
The controlled name parser found 1 interpretable distinction. These labels organize wording already present in the names; they do not establish that a distinction caused a nutrient difference.
| Description dimension | Record A | Record B |
|---|---|---|
| Fat-level wording | No matching controlled term in the source name | nonfat or fat-free wording |
Even a clean name contrast can carry hidden companions. A fried record may also include coating; a restaurant record can use a different recipe; a reduced-sodium description can differ in more than salt; and a source amount can reflect a different reporting convention. That is why this page reports the complete pair rather than treating one word as an intervention.
Portion context
A representative source amount is not a shared “serving.”
Record A uses USDA reference amount at 31 g. Record B uses USDA reference amount at 33 g. Those labels and gram weights come from their respective records. They are useful for scaling the chosen profile, but they are not recommendations and need not describe equal amounts.
The representative amounts do not cross Feast’s material portion-difference threshold of both 15 grams and 20%. They are still separate source measures, so the 100-gram table remains the appropriate place for an equal-weight comparison.
A cup, piece, slice, sandwich, fillet, or fluid ounce can have different gram weights across records. A matching label is not enough: check the listed grams. If accuracy matters more than convenience, weighing the food or using a current package label can be more specific than a generic survey-food measure.
Record A measures
- 1 cup245 g
- 1 tablespoon15 g
- USDA reference amount31 g
- 1 packet44 g
- 1 dipping-size container57 g
Record B measures
- 1 cup265 g
- 1 tablespoon17 g
- USDA reference amount33 g
- 1 packet44 g
- 1 dipping-size container57 g
One shared household label
1 cup: 245 g in A vs 265 g in B
The household label matches, but the source gram weights differ. These values scale each record by its own listed grams; they are practical portion context, not an equal-mass comparison.
| Nutrient | A · 245 g | B · 265 g |
|---|---|---|
| Calories | 1,186 kcal | 305 kcal |
| Protein | 3.4 g | 4 g |
| Dietary fiber | 1 g | 4.8 g |
| Sodium | 1,573 mg | 2,157 mg |
USDA source formulation evidence
The listed inputs provide another way to audit the match.
FNDDS includes input-food rows behind each standardized survey-food record. Record A’s leading listed inputs include Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, commercial, regular. Record B’s include Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat-free. Ingredient-code overlap is 0%, and normalized listed-input-weight variation is 100%.
Record A · 1 coded input
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing
- Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, commercial, regularIngredient code 4539100% of listed input weight
Record B · 1 coded input
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free
- Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat-freeIngredient code 42192100% of listed input weight
0 shared coded inputs
The two listed formulations do not share an ingredient code in this source extract. Shared codes can still carry different listed weights.
1 A-only and 1 B-only coded inputs
A-only entries include Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, commercial, regular. B-only entries include Salad dressing, blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat-free.
Important: repeated rows carrying the same ingredient code are combined before the shares and overlap are calculated. These weights belong to USDA’s source formulation: they are not a reconstructed plate, final cooked yield, visitor serving, ingredient declaration, or estimate of what is visible in a photo. USDA’s FNDDS documentation explains that these calculation recipes can represent multiple variants, may include retention or moisture adjustments, and are not product-label ingredient lists.
Choosing the closer record
Match context first; scale second.
- 01
Read both names literally
Compare cooking method, coating, edible skin or peel, sauce, additions, venue, source form, and food subtype. For this pair, the full A and B descriptions above are the evidence—not shortened search labels.
- 02
Use listed inputs as a check
If the name still leaves ambiguity, compare the leading and unique source inputs. They can reveal that two near names refer to meaningfully different standardized formulations, but they do not reconstruct your dish.
- 03
Choose an amount for that record
After choosing A or B, use its own named measure and gram weight. Do not transfer a cup, slice, or “typical amount” from the other record as if the measures were interchangeable.
- 04
Account for missing details
Brand, current restaurant recipe, cooking oil, drained weight, toppings, substitutions, and unfinished portions may not be captured. A label or weighed recipe can supersede a generic reference when it better matches the actual food.
Limits and responsible interpretation
This is a comparison of records, not a causal study.
The two records come from 2021–2023 FoodData Central Survey Foods data. The nutrient table faithfully compares their published values on the same weight basis. It does not measure two plates prepared at the same time, isolate one ingredient, or estimate the uncertainty around either value.
For this pair, the source names differ across 1 documented description dimension, while the listed formulations show 0% ingredient-code overlap and 100% normalized listed-weight variation. Moisture, ingredient proportions, preparation, and record construction can therefore move together. The page can describe the combined record difference; it cannot isolate the effect of one word.
A higher or lower number is not an overall verdict. Protein, fiber, sodium, energy, fat, micronutrients, preferences, allergies, budget, portion, and an individual’s goals answer different questions. Feast therefore reports directions and magnitudes without applying a universal “healthier” label.
This page is educational and does not diagnose a condition, prescribe a target, or replace advice from a qualified professional. For an allergy, medically directed diet, or strict ingredient limit, use verified ingredient information and guidance appropriate to that situation.
How this page qualified
A page is published only when the pair clears materiality and diversity gates.
Both records must occupy the same USDA survey-food topic and share a close food identity after a controlled vocabulary separates preparation, edible-part, source, claim, crust, and sauce wording. Exact contrast-neutral identities receive priority. Close ingredient or form substitutions can qualify when name overlap remains high and the numerical evidence is material.
For primary nutrients, Feast requires both an absolute and relative difference: at least 20 kcal and 12% for energy; 2 g and 18% for protein or fat; 5 g and 15% for carbohydrate; 1 g and 20% for fiber; 4 g and 20% for sugars; or 100 mg and 20% for sodium. A focused one-nutrient pair also needs a material representative-amount or formulation distinction. Rounding-only pairs are not published.
Unordered FDC IDs define a canonical pair, so reversing A and B cannot create another page. Each source record can appear twice at most, each USDA topic contributes no more than 40 pages, and closely repeated identity families are capped. Those rules produced a selective comparison library rather than every mathematical combination in the corpus.
Read the complete nutrition-page methodology for import, nutrient mapping, portion scaling, Daily Value, and uncertainty rules.
Decision support from the exact records on this page
Turn source data into a better next decision
These conclusions and reading paths are computed from 2 exact records behind Blue or roquefort cheese dressing versus Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.
Equal-weight result
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing is higher in calories per 100 g
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing reports 484 kcal versus 115 kcal for Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free: a 369 kcal difference when both are normalized to 100 g.
Inspect the underlying evidenceCheck the weight before comparing serving totals
Source amounts span 31–33 g
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing uses USDA source amount (31 g), while Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free uses USDA source amount (33 g). Use per 100 g for equal-weight composition; use the serving column only when those named source amounts answer your question.
Record identity is part of the estimate
Distinguish “Blue or roquefort cheese dressing” from “Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free”
These are separate USDA records with separate formulations or survey descriptions. Match preparation, additions, and the named household amount before borrowing either record’s nutrients.
Inspect the underlying evidenceContextual knowledge graph
Follow the relationship that matches your question
For Blue or roquefort cheese dressing versus Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.
Blue or roquefort cheese dressing and Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free are explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.
Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Calories: density and serving contextIn this page’s records, calories runs from 115 kcal in Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free to 484 kcal in Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, all per 100 g.
Follow this evidence path Test a nearby record choice Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free vs Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, lightBlue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free is held as one side of the comparison. The explicit record-description contrast is Fat-level wording: nonfat or fat-free wording versus No matching controlled term in the source name; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.
Follow this evidence path Test a nearby record choice Blue or roquefort cheese dressing vs Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, lightBlue or roquefort cheese dressing is held as one side of the comparison. The explicit record-description contrast is Light wording: No matching controlled term in the source name versus light wording; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.
Follow this evidence path 2 context records in this source topic Salad dressings and vegetable oilsBlue or roquefort cheese dressing and Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free belong to this USDA source-category collection. Its displayed ranges and complete exact-record catalog provide the peer set for a manual comparison; the destination does not preselect this page’s record.
Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Dietary fiber: density and serving contextIn this page’s records, dietary fiber runs from 0.4 g in Blue or roquefort cheese dressing to 1.8 g in Blue or roquefort cheese dressing, fat free, all per 100 g.
Follow this evidence path Inspect an exact record Blue or roquefort cheese dressingOpen the full nutrient table, household measures, formulation inputs, and FoodData Central 2710197 citation for this exact record—not a name-level average.
Follow this evidence path