Pork Chop (bone-in)
27.0gprotein / 100g231 cal · 14.0g fat · $$ · Quality 0.9
Sardines (canned in oil)
24.6gprotein / 100g208 cal · 11.5g fat · $ · Quality 0.9
Pork Chop (bone-in) carries 2.4g more protein per 100g than Sardines (canned in oil) (27.0g vs 24.6g) — a real but modest edge.
Neither has a meaningful edge on protein quality; they're close enough on amino acid profile that it isn't a differentiator here.
Sardines (canned in oil) is the more budget-friendly pick ($ vs $$ for Pork Chop (bone-in)), worth weighing if cost matters more than the other differences here.
Pork Chop (bone-in)'s typical serving also delivers more leucine (2200mg vs Sardines (canned in oil)'s 2000mg) — relevant if the goal is maximizing the muscle-protein-synthesis trigger per meal, not just total grams.
These two are closer than the comparison headline suggests. Either Pork Chop (bone-in) or Sardines (canned in oil) works well in most contexts — let cost, prep time, and personal preference decide rather than the macros.
Full nutrition comparison
| Per 100g | Pork Chop (bone-in) | Sardines (canned in oil) |
|---|---|---|
| Protein | 27.0g | 24.6g |
| Calories | 231 | 208 |
| Fat | 14.0g | 11.5g |
| Carbs | 0.0g | 0.0g |
| Fiber | 0.0g | 0.0g |
| Quality score | 0.9 | 0.9 |
| Relative cost | $$ | $ |
| Prep time | 15 min | 1 min |
Frequently asked
Which has more protein, pork chop (bone-in) or sardines (canned in oil)?
Pork Chop (bone-in) has 27.0g of protein per 100g compared to Sardines (canned in oil)'s 24.6g.
Which is lower in calories?
Sardines (canned in oil) is lower in calories per 100g, at 208 vs the other's 231.