Chicken thigh: baked, roasted, or broiled vs raw; fried USDA FDC 2706034 vs 2706045
Per 100 g, baked or broiled reports 24 g protein, while fried coated reports 19 g protein.
The comparison uses two cited USDA records. Their complete source names, household portions, nutrient values, and FoodData Central links remain visible below.
Record A · FDC 2706034
Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant
Check this record in FoodData Central ↗Record B · FDC 2706045
Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw
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.
-
192 kcal -
273 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 · Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not… | B · Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating… | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| CaloriesMaterial difference | 192 kcal | 273 kcal | B +81 kcal |
| ProteinMaterial difference | 24 g | 19 g | A +5 g |
| Total fatMaterial difference | 9.9 g | 18.6 g | B +8.7 g |
| CarbohydrateMaterial difference | 0 g | 6 g | B +6 g |
| Dietary fiber | 0 g | 0.2 g | B +0.2 g |
| Total sugars | 0 g | 0.1 g | B +0.1 g |
| SodiumMaterial difference | 486 mg | 346 mg | A +140 mg |
| Saturated fatMaterial difference | 2.5 g | 4.2 g | B +1.7 g |
| Potassium | 261 mg | 209 mg | A +52 mg |
| Calcium | 9 mg | 15 mg | B +6 mg |
| Iron | 1.1 mg | 1.3 mg | B +0.2 mg |
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 A
Record A reports 192 kcal, compared with 273 kcal in the other record—a difference of 81 kcal.
Which reports more protein?
Record A
Record A reports 24 g, compared with 19 g in the other record—a difference of 5 g.
Which reports more fiber?
Record B
Record B reports 0.2 g, compared with 0 g in the other record—a difference of 0.2 g.
Which reports less sodium?
Record B
Record B reports 346 mg, compared with 486 mg in the other record—a difference of 140 mg.
What differs in the source descriptions
The exact names carry information the numbers cannot.
USDA assigns both records to “Chicken, whole pieces,” but the topic label is broad. Record A is “Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant.” Record B is “Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw.” 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 4 interpretable distinctions. 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 |
|---|---|---|
| Preparation wording | baked, roasted, or broiled | raw; fried |
| Skin wording | skin not eaten | skin eaten |
| Coating wording | No matching controlled term in the source name | coating eaten; coated or breaded |
| Source context | restaurant or fast food | No matching controlled term in the source name |
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 70 g. Record B uses USDA reference amount at 110 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 two representative amounts differ by 40 g (36% of the larger amount). This is why the main table holds mass at 100 g. After selecting the closer description, use its household measure or a gram estimate for the amount actually eaten.
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 cup, cooked, diced135 g
- 1 thigh70 g
- 1 oz, cooked28 g
- USDA reference amount70 g
Record B measures
- 1 cup, cooked, diced135 g
- 1 small thigh100 g
- 1 medium thigh110 g
- 1 large thigh140 g
- 1 oz, cooked28 g
- USDA reference amount110 g
One shared household label
1 cup, cooked, diced: 135 g in A vs 135 g in B
Here the household label and listed gram weight match at displayed precision, so this particular table is also an equal-mass comparison. The values remain specific to these two source records, not a universal weight for every 1 cup, cooked, diced.
| Nutrient | A · 135 g | B · 135 g |
|---|---|---|
| Calories | 259 kcal | 369 kcal |
| Protein | 32.4 g | 25.7 g |
| Dietary fiber | 0 g | 0.3 g |
| Sodium | 656 mg | 467 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 Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat only, cooked, roasted, Vegetable oil, NFS, Salt, table. Record B’s include Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat and skin, cooked, roasted, Breading or batter as ingredient in food, Vegetable oil, NFS, Salt, table. Ingredient-code overlap is 40%, and normalized listed-input-weight variation is 97%.
Record A · 3 coded inputs
Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast…
- Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat only, cooked, roastedIngredient code 5098 · open source index97% of listed input weight
- Vegetable oil, NFSIngredient code 82101000 · open source index2% of listed input weight
- Salt, tableIngredient code 2047 · open source index1% of listed input weight
Record B · 4 coded inputs
Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from…
- Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat and skin, cooked, roastedIngredient code 5094 · open source index77.5% of listed input weight
- Breading or batter as ingredient in foodIngredient code 99995000 · open source index14.9% of listed input weight
- Vegetable oil, NFSIngredient code 82101000 · open source index7% of listed input weight
- Salt, tableIngredient code 2047 · open source index0.6% of listed input weight
2 shared coded inputs
The largest shared entries include Vegetable oil, NFS, Salt, table. Shared codes can still carry different listed weights.
1 A-only and 2 B-only coded inputs
A-only entries include Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat only, cooked, roasted. B-only entries include Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat and skin, cooked, roasted, Breading or batter as ingredient in food.
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.
- NFS means “not further specified.” The record intentionally leaves the exact subtype, size, or preparation unresolved.
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 4 documented description dimensions, while the listed formulations show 40% ingredient-code overlap and 97% 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 Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant versus Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.
Equal-weight result
Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw is higher in calories per 100 g
Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw reports 273 kcal versus 192 kcal for Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant: a 81 kcal difference when both are normalized to 100 g.
Inspect the underlying evidenceThe denominator changes the answer
Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant is denser; Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw is higher in its source amount
Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant reports 24 g per 100 g and 16.8 g in USDA source amount (70 g). Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw reports a lower 19 g per 100 g but a higher 20.9 g in USDA source amount (110 g).
Record identity is part of the estimate
Distinguish “Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant” from “Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw”
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 Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant versus Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.
Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant is explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.
Follow this evidence path Best next guide for this exact record Chicken thigh fried coatedChicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw is explicitly linked in this guide, which separates direct name matches from contextual variants.
Follow this evidence path Test a nearby record choice Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant vs Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from fast foodChicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant is held as one side of the comparison. The explicit record-description contrast is Preparation wording: baked, roasted, or broiled versus fried; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.
Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Calories: density and serving contextIn this page’s records, calories runs from 192 kcal in Chicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant to 273 kcal in Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw, all per 100 g.
Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Breading or batter as ingredient in foodUSDA input 99995000 appears in 1 of 2 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 15–15 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.
Follow this evidence path A formulation detail that separates records Chicken, broilers or fryers, thigh, meat and skin, cooked, roastedUSDA input 5094 appears in 1 of 2 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 78–78 g across those source formulations. These are source-formulation input weights, not plated or serving weights. Follow the code to inspect every represented occurrence.
Follow this evidence path 2 context records in this source topic Chicken, whole piecesChicken thigh, baked or broiled, skin not eaten, from fast food / restaurant and Chicken thigh, fried, coated, skin / coating eaten, from raw 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