Feast Get Feast
Menu

Portions and preparation · USDA nutrition

Cabbage calories per cup: 12–90 across all 10 named USDA examples

Across all 10 named USDA examples, a cup contains 12–90 calories. Their listed weights span 90–175 g, so each calorie value is calculated from that example's own gram weight and published calories per 100 g.

Portion calculator

Estimate your portion

Choose a source measure or enter the weight you ate.

Preparation and portion

Named measures come from this exact source record.

Estimated for 88 g

33calories

Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added

Protein
1.3 g
Carbs
1.9 g
Fat
2.5 g

These values scale the selected reference food by weight. Ingredients, preparation, and portion size can change your meal’s estimate.

FoodData Central Survey Foods (FNDDS) · FDC 2709888 Full nutrition profile →

Compare all 10 food records, nutrition tables and USDA sources

The 10 exact records in this guide report 6–45 calories in the records' own listed source servings and 13–58 calories per 100 grams. Those are observations from named database records—not a universal range or an estimate of an unseen plate.

Match my meal

Start with the description closest to what you ate

For Cabbage, begin by separating “Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added” from “Cabbage, savoy, cooked.” Choosing a card filters this source set; it does not infer the portion or fill in ingredients the chosen description does not name.

Showing the first 6 of 10 linked records.

Equal-weight view

How cabbage records compare at 100 grams

Five rank landmarks are shown from all 10 cited records: minimum, 25th-ranked, median-ranked, 75th-ranked, and maximum. Weight is held at 100 grams; source-serving weights are listed in the table.

  1. Minimum: Cabbage, Chinese, raw 13 kcal
    13 kcal
  2. 25th-ranked landmark: Cabbage, green, raw 31 kcal
    31 kcal
  3. Median-ranked landmark: Cabbage, red, raw 34 kcal
    34 kcal
  4. 75th-ranked landmark: Cabbage, savoy, cooked 51 kcal
    51 kcal
  5. Maximum: Cabbage, red, cooked 58 kcal
    58 kcal

Shared basis: 100 g · kilocalories

What this page compares

Named source records, not one universal meal

This guide keeps 10 named USDA records in view: 10 direct matches. All sit within “Cabbage.” The exact descriptions remain the unit of comparison; the familiar heading is only the doorway into the evidence.

Why these records appear together: The deterministic grouping rule “normalized first description segment” placed these 10 records together under the exact grouping key “cabbage.” That rule determines membership before any nutrition result is read.

For Cabbage, this page can compare 10 named records from FDC 2709888 through FDC 2709894. It cannot observe which preparation was eaten, recover unnamed additions, or supply the eaten grams.

Read the shared calculation, provenance, and uncertainty method →

Editor’s decision brief

The three facts to carry into the table

Carry the denominator, exact identity, and strongest observed contrast into every number below.

Portion

45–88 g before composition

The largest source amount is 2.0× the smallest. Read per-serving calorie differences with that mass gap in view.

Composition

45 kcal separates the fixed-weight endpoints

The lower endpoint is “Chinese, raw”; the higher is “red, cooked.” This isolates density, not ingredient causation.

Discriminator

2.1 g fiber gap per 100 g

Of protein, fiber, and sodium, the strongest normalized contrast is between “fat added” (1.0 g) and “savoy” (3.1 g).

Observed source examples

Three landmarks inside this source set—not universal endpoints

The cards are ordered by calories in each record's listed serving. Serving weights differ, so use per-100-gram values to compare composition. These selected records do not define a calorie range for every cabbage.

Important: “Lower” begins with Cabbage, Chinese, raw; “higher” ends with Cabbage, red, cooked, using each record’s own source amount. Those labels order this selected set only—they are not endpoints for every cabbage meal.

Full comparison

Compare every selected FNDDS record

For Cabbage, serving columns preserve each record’s own listed amount, while calories per 100 g hold weight constant. A dash means the cited record does not supply that field; it does not mean the nutrient is absent.

On smaller screens, focus the table and scroll horizontally to read every column.

USDA records selected for the Cabbage nutrition guide
Exact source record Match Source amount Calories kcal / 100 g Protein Fiber Sodium USDA
Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added Direct name match 88 gUSDA reference amount 33 kcal 37 1.3 g 0.9 g 169 mg FDC 2709888 ↗
Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, no added fat Direct name match 85 gUSDA reference amount 12 kcal 14 1.3 g 0.9 g 160 mg FDC 2709887 ↗
Cabbage, Chinese, raw Direct name match 45 gUSDA reference amount 6 kcal 13 0.7 g 0.5 g 29 mg FDC 2709774 ↗
Cabbage, green, cooked with butter or margarine Direct name match 78 gUSDA reference amount 41 kcal 52 0.8 g 2 g 118 mg FDC 2709892 ↗
Cabbage, green, cooked with oil Direct name match 78 gUSDA reference amount 45 kcal 58 0.8 g 2 g 104 mg FDC 2709891 ↗
Cabbage, green, cooked, no added fat Direct name match 75 gUSDA reference amount 24 kcal 32 0.8 g 2 g 103 mg FDC 2709889 ↗
Cabbage, green, raw Direct name match 45 gUSDA reference amount 14 kcal 31 0.4 g 1.1 g 7 mg FDC 2709773 ↗
Cabbage, red, cooked Direct name match 78 gUSDA reference amount 45 kcal 58 1 g 1.6 g 108 mg FDC 2709893 ↗
Cabbage, red, raw Direct name match 45 gUSDA reference amount 15 kcal 34 0.6 g 0.9 g 5 mg FDC 2709775 ↗
Cabbage, savoy, cooked Direct name match 78 gUSDA reference amount 40 kcal 51 1.6 g 2.4 g 120 mg FDC 2709894 ↗

Portion analysis

Serving total and calorie density answer different questions

The listed source amounts run from 45 to 88 grams—a 43-gram gap before composition enters the comparison. Their own source servings run from 6 calories for “Chinese, raw” to 45 for “red, cooked.” At a fixed 100 grams, “Chinese, raw” is 13 calories and “red, cooked” is 58—a fixed-weight separation of 45 calories. For Cabbage, the serving view answers “how much is in the database portion?”; the 100-gram view answers “how concentrated is the matched record?” Neither reveals how many grams were actually eaten.

The scaling rule: multiply a per-100-gram value by eaten grams ÷ 100. The arithmetic is exact; the result is only as defensible as the record match and portion estimate.

Preparation analysis

The long description carries the evidence

The published descriptions distinguish forms such as “Chinese, cooked, fat added”, “Chinese, raw”, “green, cooked, no added fat”, “red, cooked”, and “savoy, cooked”. The source formulations contain 8 distinct ingredient codes; examples that appear in only part of the set include salt, table, cabbage, green, raw, cabbage, chinese (pak-choi), raw, and oil or table fat, nfs. On this Cabbage page, those rows make the records inspectable, but they are not a controlled experiment: they cannot tell us that one named input, by itself, caused a nutrient difference.

Database precision is not meal certainty. Retain the exact description beside the number so later corrections remain possible.

What changes the comparison

Four drivers worth checking before choosing a record

The family label “Cabbage” cannot resolve the differences between Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added and Cabbage, savoy, cooked. The four checks below identify the record wording, source weight, and formulation evidence that can.

  1. 01

    Source weight before serving calories

    The source amounts span 45–88 grams. Compare per 100 grams before reading a serving-calorie gap as a composition gap.

  2. 02

    The words that split the family

    Representative record-level distinctions include “Chinese, cooked, fat added”, “Chinese, raw”, “green, cooked, no added fat”, “red, cooked”, and “savoy, cooked”. Those phrases are evidence for choosing a record, not decorative subtitle text.

  3. 03

    Formulation evidence, with limits

    8 source-input codes appear across the selected records. Their presence and listed weights describe USDA formulations, not finished plated proportions.

  4. 04

    The unresolved plate

    Even “Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added” leaves the eaten grams and unnamed oils, sauces, toppings, substitutions, or leftovers unresolved. Preserve those Cabbage unknowns for correction instead of converting them into false precision.

Record matching

Match identity first; scale quantity second

Read the source name as a sequence of decisions. First confirm that cabbage is the right meal family. Then resolve the phrases that actually separate this set—“Chinese, cooked, fat added”, “green, cooked with butter or margarine”, “green, raw”, and “savoy, cooked”—before comparing gram weight. If a package, menu, or known recipe provides a closer first-party description, prefer it and keep this USDA record as a transparent fallback.

A practical matching checklist

  1. Read the complete Cabbage source description, including preparation and additions.
  2. Compare the listed source weight with the amount actually eaten.
  3. Prefer a current package or restaurant source when a specific branded item is known.
  4. Record toppings, sauces, cooking fat, sides, and substitutions that the selected description does not name.

Explore this meal family

2 more-specific cabbage guides

Use a focused guide when its description matches your meal. Each one keeps its own exact source records and links back to this broader family.

Focused guide Cabbage, Chinese Cabbage, Chinese: compare 3 exact USDA records by source calories, 100-gram values, portions, and citations. Focused guide Cabbage, green Cabbage, green: compare 4 exact USDA records by source calories, 100-gram values, portions, and citations.

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 10 exact records behind Cabbage source-record guide. Links are chosen by record identity, controlled contrast, formulation input, nutrient spread, or serving context—not by loose keyword similarity.

Equal-weight result

Cabbage, green, cooked with oil is higher in total fat per 100 g

Cabbage, green, cooked with oil reports 3.3 g versus 0.2 g for Cabbage, Chinese, raw: a 3.1 g difference when both are normalized to 100 g.

Inspect the underlying evidence

The denominator changes the answer

Cabbage, red, raw is denser; Cabbage, green, cooked, no added fat is higher in its source amount

Cabbage, red, raw reports 34 kcal per 100 g and 15 kcal in USDA source amount (45 g). Cabbage, green, cooked, no added fat reports a lower 32 kcal per 100 g but a higher 24 kcal in USDA source amount (75 g).

Choose the record before reading the number

Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added and Cabbage, Chinese, raw are not interchangeable

The page keeps both records at the same 100 g denominator and makes Preparation wording (No matching controlled term in the source name versus raw) the explicit record-description contrast. It does not show that the wording difference caused a nutrient difference. Pick the description that matches the food in front of you rather than averaging away the distinction.

Inspect the underlying evidence

Contextual knowledge graph

Follow the relationship that matches your question

For Cabbage source-record guide, each path states why the destination belongs here, so you can distinguish a true evidentiary connection from a merely similar label.

Compare two records on this page Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added vs Cabbage, Chinese, raw

Both records appear in this page’s evidence set. The explicit record-description contrast is Preparation wording: No matching controlled term in the source name versus raw; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.

Follow this evidence path Compare two records on this page Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, no added fat vs Cabbage, Chinese, raw

Both records appear in this page’s evidence set. The explicit record-description contrast is Preparation wording: No matching controlled term in the source name versus raw; it is a selection cue, not evidence of cause.

Follow this evidence path 10 context records in this source topic Cabbage

Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added and Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, no added fat 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 A formulation detail that separates records Salt, table

USDA input 2047 appears in 7 of 10 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 0.3–0.3 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 Cabbage, green, raw

USDA input 11109 appears in 4 of 10 context records; its summed listed input weight spans 100–100 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 Put the observed spread in corpus context Sodium: density and serving context

In this page’s records, sodium runs from 12 mg in Cabbage, red, raw to 192 mg in Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, fat added, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path Put the observed spread in corpus context Iron: density and serving context

In this page’s records, iron runs from 0 mg in Cabbage, red, cooked to 0.8 mg in Cabbage, Chinese, cooked, no added fat, all per 100 g.

Follow this evidence path